Response to interpellation 2022/23:85 on measures to curb fraud with travel deductions
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M believes that the government takes tax fraud seriously and has given Skatteverket new tools to improve control possibilities 1 2 3. M argues that the current system is better than the proposal S previously submitted because it does not disadvantage the countryside 4. M emphasizes that they chose to keep the old system because the new one was too expensive and would not significantly reduce the fraud 3. M believes it is important to give Skatteverket better tools 4 and that the new task in the employer declaration is a fundamental and important task that will yield results 4. S argues that the government's measures lack effectiveness 5. S believes that instead, a standardized and travel-allowance-neutral system should be introduced to minimize fraud 5. S claims that tax fraud drains resources from welfare 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Mr. Speaker! Good morning! I will do as we usually do, that is, I will first read out the response that the government has to the interpellor.
Niklas Karlsson has asked me what assessment I make regarding the extent of fraud with the travel deduction and what measures I intend to take to curb the fraud.
The government takes the tax error seriously. According to Skatteverket's latest assessment, the controllable tax error for the travel deduction amounts to approximately 2.4 billion kronor per year. It is, however, important to distinguish between unintentional errors and deliberate fraud. No information is available on what proportion can be attributed specifically to fraud.
In accordance with the government's proposition on a maintained travel deduction, which the Riksdag has now decided upon, new regulations came into force at the turn of the year, which mean that the workplace's address shall be stated in the employer's declaration. When the Swedish Tax Agency (Skatteverket) gains access to the workplace's address, the reasonableness of the travel deductions can be assessed regarding both distance and time savings. These are fundamental requirements and conditions for the right to deduction that previously could not be assessed without an investigation. Through the new regulations, the Swedish Tax Agency's control possibilities are thus improved, and I therefore assess that the conditions to reduce the risk of errors and fraud in the travel deduction system are good.
Niklas Karlsson (S)
Mr. Speaker! Good morning! I thank you for the answer, Minister for Finance.
I note that in one of the opening sentences from the Minister for Finance in the response to my interpellation, the Minister for Finance said that the government takes the tax fraud seriously. That is good enough. Fraud is fraud, and fraud is unacceptable.
Furthermore, the Minister for Finance said that the Swedish Tax Agency estimates the error at 2.4 billion kronor per year. It is a figure that has varied, and varies, depending on who you ask and when you ask. We know that Transportföretagen refers to the Swedish Tax Agency in its reporting and cites a figure of 3.1 billion. In the investigation Tax Relief for Business Travel, which was submitted in 2019 and which subsequently formed the basis for a new proposal for a travel deduction system, a tax error, i.e., tax evasion, was reported at 3.5 billion.
Regardless of whether it is a question of 2.4 or 3.5, it is important to consider which magnitudes we are talking about. The state's total tax expenditure for the travel deduction in 2022 is 5.4 billion kronor. At the same time, an error in the travel deduction is estimated to be between 2.5 and 3.5 billion kronor. Furthermore, the error - the fraud - in the travel deduction has increased over time. In the controls that Skatteverket performs, more than half of them show errors. The absolute majority of the errors are not in favor of the one making the deduction, which is also an indication that the error is quite extensive and that there is a fraud in the deduction system that needs to be addressed.
In my world, if one means business regarding the fact that fraud is a concern and that the tax error must be rectified, one must also demonstrate decisiveness, leadership, and clarity. A powerful government that takes the issue seriously would bring clarity to the uncertainty that exists regarding how large a share can be attributed to fraud specifically and not to others.
In the Minister for Finance's response, the only thing delivered is that new regulations have been issued for Skatteverket to improve the possibility of control, and this is for a tax error amounting to 2 ½ to 3 ½ billion kronor on an annual basis. These are resources that could have been used to finance our welfare, the upgrading of the defense, which faces major challenges, and the police, who need their resources. We need to strengthen the social security systems, and we need to inject more money into welfare.
Therefore, I can initially say that it is good that the government takes this seriously, but at the same time, I express a certain degree of disappointment. The power to do something about the situation is lacking. The only thing one refers to in practice are new regulations for Skatteverket to improve the agency's control possibilities.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Mr. Speaker! A big thank you to Niklas Karlsson for the question! It is an important question, which obviously affects many of us in both the Riksdag and the government.
I completely share Niklas Karlsson's view that decisive action is required to seriously address the problems with both fraud and errors in the travel deduction. This government is now doing in less than 100 days what Niklas Karlsson's party did not do in eight years, namely taking action on the issue.
The Swedish Tax Agency now receives a new control tool to more easily identify errors, whether they are intentional or unintentional. I believe that both Niklas Karlsson and I see and understand that some cheat deliberately and others make unintentional errors. But regardless, it must be correct in the tax returns and deductions.
That is why the task, as I mentioned earlier, in the employer declaration regarding where the employee actually has their workplace is so important. It then becomes easier for the Swedish Tax Agency to make selections for follow-up and control. It is also something that the Swedish Tax Agency has requested.
With this said, the question is whether all errors and all fraud will disappear. Probably not. I will follow the issue very closely because I think it is important. It is perhaps good to explain in this context that the old travel deduction has been retained instead of introducing the new one. It was not that the new travel deduction in itself would have reduced fraud and errors, but Skatteverket advised against the new system being introduced. There are problems with both, but what we are doing is taking action. We are giving Skatteverket a very important tool to address the problems with errors and fraud.
Niklas Karlsson (S)
Mr. Speaker! The feat of strength that the Minister for Finance now says is being taken holds up poorly when one meets reality and has to report which measures are actually being taken. It is roughly like going around and saying that one can easily lift 100 kilos, and when one finally has to prove that one can do it, one manages at best to lift a 6-kilo dumbbell.
You say that you want to take action against this, but the only thing you are doing is changing the regulations for Skatteverket so that they can increase their controls. But there are more proposals that could be implemented to actually do something about this.
One could develop a travel deduction system that is simple and clear, which reduces cheating and makes it easy for the person who is going to make the deduction to understand what applies so that they – the vast majority – who do not want to make a mistake but want everything to be correct have that possibility.
When it comes to verification, one cannot simply engage in controls. It is about legislation, and it is about the design of the travel deduction system. One can ensure that clarity is created. One can ensure that the correct legislation is in place.
In reality, what the Minister for Finance presents to the Riksdag today is rather a defensive stance. If one truly means business about doing something about this, and if one wants to show leadership and take the powerful measures that one says one wants to take, one must prove it. One must deliver to the Riksdag.
It is clear; I will not distrust what the Minister for Finance says. I rather look forward to new proposals to the Swedish Riksdag where the government delivers proposals for a travel deduction system that minimizes fraud and which is not just about controls but is about adequate legislation, simplicity, and clarity.
It is, after all, the case, and the Swedish Tax Agency is very clear about it, that if one is to significantly reduce fraud and errors in the travel deduction, there are two measures that must be delivered. One is that one has a standardized travel deduction, and the other is that it is travel-method neutral.
Such a proposal was moving forward in Sweden's Riksdag this summer, and a broad majority had stood behind that proposal. But the change of government and the negotiations that took place between the Tidö parties meant that it was completely scrapped.
One can naturally have views that details in the travel deduction were incorrect. The Moderaterna and the Minister for Finance have that, fair enough. But it contained travel mode neutrality and standardization.
None of that we see today, except that the only thing reported from the government and the Minister for Finance is that they are changing the regulations for Skatteverket. It is insufficient. It is not sufficiently proactive. And that, Minister for Finance, is at least in my world an entirely too defensive stance if one has the starting point and the perception that one takes tax errors and tax fraud seriously.
I look forward to future interpellation debates. Since the Minister for Finance now says that she wants to follow this closely, I, in my capacity as a Member of Parliament, will take her at her word and follow her in her work and return with questions and interpellations on this. But I also look forward to concrete proposals to take a position on, which follow the path that those who work with the travel deduction speak of as being required to obtain a travel deduction where fraud and tax errors are minimized, that is, travel cost neutrality and standardization.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Mr. Speaker! In the 100 days - 101, perhaps - that I have been Minister for Finance, we have done some things. For example, we have introduced what I have now said a couple of times: better tools for Skatteverket. I still think it is a fairly good pace.
To step back a bit regarding the two different travel deduction systems, it is only to state what I believe Niklas Karlsson and I could agree on: There is no perfect travel deduction system.
It can be done in different ways, and what we observed when we negotiated the budget for this year was that there are enormous needs. There are incredibly large priorities that must be made, and therefore we chose not to introduce the new system that the Social Democrats had proposed earlier. It was about money, naturally, because it was a very expensive system – it was about 4.2 billion. Furthermore, we saw that it would not become so much better regarding tax evasion and tax errors. It was not the case that the proposal that the S-government put forward would significantly change fraud and errors in relation to what currently applies. That is all we can state.
Then I think it is important to say that we move forward and continue with the so-called old system. But what we did that was very important for people who struggle and travel far in their jobs was that we also raised the travel deduction from 18.50 to 25 kronor. It had not been raised for very many years despite the fact that fuel prices have increased. It is reasonable and right to do for people who actually have to take the car to work.
But I share Niklas Karlsson's view that we must minimize fraud and errors. That is something I am very clear about after my 101 days on the job. Over eight years, very little actually happened in this area, but I am not a person who will look backward. I will look forward, and I will follow this issue extremely closely. I also, of course, have a close dialogue with Skatteverket so that we can constantly improve the tools and improve the ways to identify the errors where there has been obvious fraud, but also the unintentional errors. It must also be easy to do the right thing, and we all know that it is not always completely simple.
To summarize, I think we are doing exactly what Niklas Karlsson says. We are giving Skatteverket new tools. We are following the issue closely. I will continue to do so, and I am ready every day of the week to discuss with Niklas Karlsson good proposals on how we can tackle fraud and errors regarding travel deductions.
Niklas Karlsson (S)
Mr. Speaker! I am fully aware that the government has now been in power for 100 days and some more, and I am not asking for the unreasonable. I am not asking for the Minister for Finance to come to the Riksdag and account for perfect or exact measures within the travel deduction system that the government has delivered.
I am interested in what you want to do, in what plan you have - not in what you have not managed to achieve in the 100 days you have sat in government, but in what you want for the hundreds of days that remain of your government period. What does the government want?
Then it is the case that what the Minister for Finance reports is clinically devoid of ideas and proposals. She refers to a provision that has been changed at Skatteverket so that they shall have increased control possibilities, but nothing more.
It is large resources that are being drained from our welfare. It affects legitimacy. It affects trust. It affects our opportunity to finance the welfare. It is somewhere between 2 billion and 3.5 billion kronor that we could have used for other things. And we know how it looks – the defense's large expansion, the police who need resources, the welfare that needs to be strengthened, the social security system that could be improved.
I am glad that the Minister for Finance nevertheless expresses that she wants to talk about travel deductions with me every day of the week. I will not use it against her, for we both have other things to do. But the question will return, for here there is - as a former Member of Parliament said when he spoke about tax evasion a number of years ago - morality to improve, resources to retrieve and solidarity to build.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the final words, which I can truly sign off on regardless of which person from left to right said this.
There is much more to be done. I still want to remind the chamber and whoever may be listening and watching this that the travel deduction we have now is better than the one the Social Democrats put forward because it does not disadvantage those who live in the countryside. There were also parts in the proposal that Niklas Karlsson stood behind that were good, but when it comes to the core issue of this interpellation debate, that proposal was not better in relation to what is now happening to tackle fraud and errors. But I promise: What the Social Democrats did not do in eight years, I will continue to follow up on.
I think the member may be slightly trivializing the control tool that Skatteverket is now receiving. How do you get at fraud and errors? Well, you do it by giving the responsible authority the right tools. Now they get significantly better tools when, through this task in the employer declaration, they can actually know where the employee really lives. It is a fairly fundamental and important task, and I am convinced that it will yield results.
With that said, I will continue to follow this. I think it is outrageous that there are so many people cheating, even though I know that the vast majority of people do the right thing and really want to do the right thing.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.