Response to interpellation 2024/25:41 on economic equality

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! Eva Lindh has asked me if I can elaborate on what gender equality analysis has been guiding the state budget for 2025. She has also asked if I intend to act to produce a plan for more equal taxation and fiscal policy. Finally, she has asked which reforms for increased equality I want to prioritize.

I welcome the member's engagement in the issue. The Government is actively working to achieve the goal of economic equality. Women and men shall have the same opportunities and conditions regarding paid work that provides economic independence for life.

The Government closely follows the development of economic equality. Each year, the development is reported in the appendix to the budget bill, Economic Equality. In the budget bill for 2025, the effect of the Government's economic reforms during the mandate period up to and including the budget bill for 2025 was reported. It is stated there that the cumulative effect of the reforms so far during the mandate period increases women's disposable income more than men's in percentage terms. In connection with the preparation of individual reforms that affect women's and men's finances, the effect on economic equality is an important part of the decision-making basis.

Strengthening economic equality is an ongoing task for the government. This applies to fiscal policy in general and not least reforms concerning the tax and transfer system. Welfare services are used to a greater extent by women than by men and are therefore also an important tool for reducing differences in economic resources between women and men. During the mandate period, the government has provided municipalities and regions with extensive subsidies in several rounds.

Women have, on average, lower earned incomes than men. There are several explanations for this. One important explanation is that women work part-time to a greater extent than men. Women also have a lower labor force participation than men. Lower earned incomes mean lower pensions in the long run and fewer opportunities to have savings. Reforms that contribute to increasing women's participation in the labor market are therefore a priority area for the government. This leads to higher earned incomes and pensions and, in the long run, higher savings.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! Equality is incredibly important. Perhaps it is so that I am even more inspired by equality today than I was when I was younger - precisely because I see how equality hits.

We know that in times of crisis it is always women and children who are hit hardest. So it has also been in Sweden. The difficult time we have had of inflation and recession has affected many, but most of all those who already previously turned over every krona. Women are in the majority among them. Women have lower wages, have more insecure employment and work part-time more often. When everything becomes a little more expensive, it becomes very much more expensive for those who already turn over every krona. Women who have retired have it toughest. They see that it makes a big difference. When it comes to those who now have increased debts, it is also women who are hit.

We must continue to fight for equality, because it is not getting better. Equality is stalling, and with this government, it is getting worse. The inequality in the economy and the unjust difference between women and men is now increasing. I will give some examples.

The budget for 2025 could carelessly be said to be a budget for well-off men in larger cities. There have been enormous tax cuts for those who already have, and the vast majority of them are men. Job tax credits and basic deductions increase the income gap between the genders. 300,000 more men are estimated to receive a share of the tax cut, and they receive a larger tax cut because they have higher salaries. Furthermore, the government has removed the job tax credit's tapering. It costs quite a lot of money. Everyone who has work income over 65,000 kronor per month gets a tax reduction. 70 percent of them are men. Among those who earn over today's threshold of 51,000, there are also more men than women. Taken together, all the tax cuts mean that economic inequality increases.

However, during the next year, the government will remove the support that has gone to, for example, single women, who have had it incredibly tough during this time. Over 40 percent of single parents have had to borrow money to put food on the table for their children, and most of them are women.

It concerns me and hurts my heart very much that we cannot agree that one must make investments in both women and men and address the differences that actually continue to exist between women and men in Sweden.

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

Sofia Amloh (S)

Madam Speaker! Economic equality has been highlighted in several ways during recent years, partly through analyses from authorities and other actors, and partly through the 2023 Nobel Prize in Economics. Several new knowledge bases and investigations with a focus on economic equality have been presented during recent years. In several of these, proposals for measures that can contribute to increased economic equality have also been submitted. But this has not resulted in concrete measures. One exception, however, is the area of foreign-born women's establishment in the labor market. There, measures have been implemented, and there are more proposed in a number of different investigations. I hope that these measures can become a reality.

When it comes to the important sub-goal of economic equality, progress has stalled, for example when it comes to wage and income differences. The sub-goal is heavily influenced by the overall policy and prevailing systems, for example the tax system.

In the answer we have received from the Minister for Finance, it is referred to that welfare services are used to a greater extent by women than by men. It is therefore also an important tool to reduce the differences in economic resources between women and men.

The Minister for Finance says that during the mandate period, the government has provided municipalities and regions with extensive supplements in several rounds. Extensive supplements, Madam Speaker, is perhaps for a moderate Finance Minister. But for the healthcare system, which is in the greatest crisis in decades, it is a drop in the ocean. What the government calls extensive supplements is precisely a drop in the ocean.

Furthermore, I want to point out that the picture of how political measures affect equality is somewhat distorted. The calculations that the government produces every year in an appendix to the state budget miss several important factors. Defense, the judiciary, the police, and business issues are not distributed between women and men because they are judged to be collective expenditures corresponding to a general interest. At the same time, men utilize, for example, correctional services and support for companies more often than women.

On the other hand, the government counts increased general grants from the state to municipalities and regions and investments in health and medical care in such as favor women more than men. The risk is that the picture of how the state's public resources benefit women and men then becomes a bit simplified. To get a complete picture, we need to weigh in several aspects.

It is also doubtful whether investments in healthcare should really be counted as favoring women more than men, since differences in costs are largely due to the fact that women give birth to children. If we subtract the costs that exist for new members of society being born, the cost difference decreases significantly.

My question to the Minister for Finance is: Why does the government not want to reduce the economic gaps between men and women further? Why are they not being reduced?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you to the interpellor for a very important question! I know that it is a matter close to the heart for Eva Lindh, and it is a matter close to my heart, that women's economic freedom but also women's security should be strengthened in Sweden.

I know that I have mentioned my grandmother very many times here in the chamber. I will add some variety and mention my grandmother [maternal/paternal grandmother]. She was born in 1902, was named Matilda, and was born in Uppland. She had a rather tough life with many children in a short period of time, and grandfather was away very much.

It is still interesting to reflect on the fact that when she was born, women did not have the right to vote in all elections. The country was still quite poor. Women carried a heavy burden in very many ways, as my grandmother did.

Since then, however, a fantastic amount of things have happened that we can be happy about. Many have stepped forward and done a fantastic job in various areas. But just as the interpellor pointed out, there is more to be done both regarding economic equality and regarding other parts of society.

We see, for example, a great deal of insecurity. The resources that are allocated to police and defense, and particularly to the justice system and police, should of course also strengthen women's security. I want our children and grandchildren to have an even safer Sweden and not just wealthier years ahead.

So, regarding the economy and equality. It is still the case that one can think in many ways about how the budget bill is presented. It is in this area not at all large changes compared to when the Socialdemokrater presented this.

The fact is that during these three years, the effect of the reforms we are making is that, in percentage terms, we increase the disposable incomes more for women than for men. It is not a large difference, but it is a difference. It is a fact. Then one can think that it is calculated in the wrong way or something else. But that is how we do it, and that is how it is.

With that said, I want, we, and probably everyone here, that economic equality should become much greater. What challenges do we have there? It is ownership. Women in Sweden own half of what men own in 2024.

There is a great deal to do regarding ownership. It concerns forests, real estate, and shares. Not everyone obviously likes the ISK savings. But the Swedes like it. Many from left to right, regardless of what they vote for, save.

Many women save in order to be able to have a buffer and an independent autonomy. They save a small part of their salary, even if it is not many kronor, to get a return and to be able to have a sum so that they know they have their own capital that is just that woman's.

Unfortunately, for too many women, both ownership and life incomes are lower than for men. Then the question is: Is it the tax system and the pension system that are wrong? They are in themselves gender-neutral. The fact is that women have lower incomes. There is much more to be done when it comes to a segregated labor market but also when it comes to lower pensions due to the lower earned income.

There is much to do on broad and many fronts. The government takes its responsibility. During the years of high inflation, I have had many of these single mothers before my eyes when we, for example, raised the housing allowance level further. We have had it for a time, and the level is still raised because it is tough and another pressure.

We continue to lower the tax. We have done that for two years in a row. It is something that the Social Democrats do not do very often. As I said, they raise it in Stockholm. It does not become much easier for women, for example.

This is fundamentally a very important issue for the government. I thank you for the interpellation and will get back to you. The cumulative effect of the reforms in the budget so far during the mandate period is that women's disposable incomes increase more than men's, in percentage terms.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! When one sits and listens, one can believe that everything the Finance Minister says is true, and most of it is true. But certain things are used exactly as if they were a truth, even though they are not true.

We have not raised the tax. We also lowered the tax in our budget. We did it for ordinary people. We chose not to significantly lower the tax for those who already have. It makes a difference. It would also make a difference for women.

If you lower the tax for ordinary people, it will also benefit women in particular. We think it is reasonable to level the conditions that exist in Sweden, that is, to increase equality even though we have led the way in equality in many ways.

Many countries look at Sweden, or have at least looked at Sweden, as a role model in that steps forward have been taken. Some of the things that have truly elevated Sweden are now removed.

It concerns, for example, the feminist foreign policy. It was a clear recipe for success that we worked specifically with feminist foreign policy. I can give a lot of examples. But it does not belong to economic policy, so I will just concentrate on that.

When it comes to welfare, we know that experiences and research from all over the world show that cuts in public spending affect women disproportionately, with long-term negative consequences for equality and growth as a result.

Now we know that the resources for welfare are insufficient. This naturally means that it affects patients, staff, and all of us who live in Sweden. But we know that women are particularly affected.

When it comes to the financial economy, that is to say when investments are made in what we call the household economy, the government has also lost. It is exactly as I said in my first contribution. All these investments mean that it is men who receive the most.

So, the largest part of the initiatives that the government makes in its budget go to men in larger cities and not to women. This means that inequality increases.

When it comes to women's freedom and independence, women are losing out now. When it comes to investments in welfare, which primarily benefit women and children, equality is losing out now. When it comes to values regarding equality, equality is losing out now. We also know this through research. Not only in Sweden but in the whole world, equality is on the way to decreasing. Therefore, to counteract this, we must make extra investments to strengthen women's independence, freedom, and opportunities for the same good life that men - not all men - have in Sweden. The conditions must be equal. That is what equality is about.

Therefore, I ask again: Is the Minister for Finance satisfied with this?

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

Sofia Amloh (S)

Madam Speaker! I thought I would start by reminding and advising the government of the things I began with in my previous contribution: There is a lot of new knowledge material in the area. There are investigations, and not least, there is a Nobel Prize winner who has researched and dedicated their life to economic equality. There are, therefore, concrete proposals for measures that can be taken to reduce the gaps and increase economic equality between men and women.

Since I am already on the topic of advising the government, I can also provide a tip regarding the Commission on Equal Life Incomes, which in the spring of 2022 submitted proposals in a report titled Minska gapet (Reduce the gap). The proposals aim to increase economic equality in the long term.

If one wants to do something, it is possible to make a difference here instead of letting the whole thing come to a standstill. The Gender Equality Authority is now warning that we might even be moving backwards when it comes to the gender equality goals, not least when it concerns economic equality.

Madam Speaker! Tax cuts that benefit men, and rich men in particular, are never good for economic equality - no matter how much the Finance Minister tries to smooth this over.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! I received a question from Eva Lindh as to whether the Minister for Finance is satisfied. The answer to that question is very simple: no. How could we be satisfied as long as we are not fully equal? In many ways, we have come a long way, as I said, in comparison to how it was when my grandmother was born. But in other places, one wonders why it has taken so long. Why do Sweden's women own only half of what men own? Why are there significantly fewer women who start and run companies?

And if we leave the economic area a little bit – but it is still connected – one can wonder why there are so many girls and women living under a honor oppression that makes it so that they cannot even go to work or study at SFI because they have a man who prevents them. In the worst case, the honor oppression can not only lead to psychological and physical abuse but also to death.

Of course, we cannot be satisfied in Sweden 2024. That is why we are all here politically active and want to improve. From my first day at this job, you have heard me say many times that it has been a priority to fight inflation. It is not just a kind of slogan, but we want to push down inflation so that prices do not continue to rise.

Now the government ensures that those who have it toughest, men and women, are compensated through various indexations. When it comes to the welfare sectors, we are pushing it to 22 billion kronor this year, and next year it will be an additional 9 billion. We know that regions and municipalities will have 50 billion lower in pension costs next year because inflation has been dampened, which is very good. There we also see the importance of getting down the inflation.

The supplementary grant that we have had for families with children receiving housing allowance, we are now extending. It goes primarily to single mothers and women.

Madam Speaker! We shall be satisfied the day Sweden is equal. It is when life incomes are equal and when both men and women can get off the bus at one in the morning when they have been at a party. One should not have to be a man to be able to take the bus.

The government will continue, and we do so in this budget. I think it is important to return to what the first part of the debate was about: to do things in both the short and long term, to ensure here and now that the economy gets started, to support the economy so that it gains momentum and to ensure that it also grows in the long term. Increased growth provides more resources for welfare. Just a half percent in increased GDP provides 15 billion more in reform space. The economy needs to grow, and in that, the government is doing a number of things. This includes, among other things, a lower marginal tax, but we are also lowering the tax for everyone at the same time.

Just to have it said: I entered the Riksdag in 2006. 90 percent of all nursing assistants in Sweden are women. If we add – which I have not done but absolutely will go home and do – all those tax cuts for low and middle-income earners that I have been involved in making during these years, both in the government and in the Riksdag, we see that many nursing assistants, that is to say mostly women, have received a proper reinforcement of their income.

It is very good that the Social Democrats are also starting to talk about lower taxes now. It really pleases me, because it makes things easier for people. One can do both, and one can prioritize. One can, for example, lower aid, as the government has done. Sweden is one of the world's most generous countries, but we have lowered the aid and ensured that the defense, the police, the justice system, and welfare receive more money. One can, therefore, do both. And if one wants to do something for women, as the government has done during these years, one can, for example, ensure that taxes on work are lowered so that people can keep more of their salary and perhaps save a bit of money.

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

Eva Lindh (S)

Madam Speaker! With permission, the Minister for Finance: I would not be satisfied either. I think it is deplorable that inequality is now increasing in Sweden, because it actually is. It is increasing because the resources for welfare are becoming fewer. It means that all those who are victims of men's violence against women do not receive the support they need. It means that the school does not receive the resources it needs to strengthen equality.

Welfare is so incredibly important in many ways, and now it is not receiving enough resources. That is one thing. This is truly a decisive part of increasing equality in a country.

The second thing is that economic equality is now decreasing in the economy because women are disadvantaged in the budget that the SD-led government is presenting. This means that rich men become richer and that women who struggle to put food on the table for their children will receive fewer resources next year. Those who already have will get even more. The gaps are increasing.

At the same time, we now have a force in the entire world that also affects Sweden. Equality is being undermined. Then we must work harder to strengthen equality in Sweden and in the entire world. It is something that is not being done right now.

No, we need to do something real and something big to increase equality on all levels and make women more economically equal, free and independent. Women should be able to live a good life.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! I can underline the last sentences in Eva Lindh's contribution with a thick pen so that they stand out even more. There is significantly more to be done, and this is a focus that the government has. Last year, for example, when we did not raise the break point as in all other indexings but let it remain, we chose instead to make a broad tax cut. That was important for many women. It is also important that we have marginal taxes that are not all too high.

Many things can be done simultaneously to ensure that women's economy grows. That is a focus we have.

When it comes to welfare, it is good to remind that it is the municipalities and regions that have the primary responsibility. However, we have taken a large responsibility during this time. The 22 billion in this year's budget that I mentioned was, therefore, 40 percent of the budget space. We know that it saves many jobs, especially for women.

In the tough times we are in now, we still see the light at the end of the tunnel. It will turn around. But the work for greater economic equality continues on all levels, both in ownership and in entrepreneurship.

Something I also think is important to point out is that we have a large corporate portfolio that we manage. There, we have a completely unique and world-leading equality. That is something to be happy about. I am talking about the state-owned companies, which I am responsible for. They are world-unique, and we have ensured that they are world-unique when it comes to equality. They are a role model for other large portfolios and for the stock market.

It is possible to ensure that even positions at that level are equal. It is about role models in leadership positions. It is both outdated and unwise, I usually say, not to have equal corporate management at both CEO and chairman level. This is an important part that shows the way for other women and young girls who continue their studies to take those types of positions. At all levels, women's economy needs to be strengthened.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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