Response to interpellation 2024/25:578 on the Social Insurance Agency's clawbacks regarding personal assistance
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 M considers personal assistance to be a freedom reform that must be safeguarded and protected against criminal exploitation 1. 1 M argues that Försäkringskassan should counteract individuals becoming liable for repayment through an action plan and that new forms of follow-up need to be investigated 1. 1 2 M emphasizes that the individual is always liable for repayment in the case of incorrect payments but that Försäkringskassan shall consider waivers for special reasons 1 2. 3 M wants to increase information efforts so that no one should feel fear in contacting the authority 3. 3 M considers that the system should be predictable and legally secure 3. 3 M works with the nationalization of assistance to ensure long-term and legally secure assessments 3. 3 M argues that a lack of regular follow-ups has caused problems linked to crime 3. 3 M wants the investigation's proposals on follow-ups to counteract repayments 3. 4 M emphasizes the importance of self-determination, freedom, and participation 4. 4 M wants people in need of assistance to feel security and have clear information about their eligibility 4.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Madam Speaker! Christofer Bergenblock has asked me if I am prepared to take the initiative to stop Försäkringskassan's recovery activities regarding personal assistance in cases where the recoveries are not based on intentional fraud or deceit. Christofer Bergenblock has further asked me what other measures I intend to take to resolve the problems with Försäkringskassan's recovery activities regarding personal assistance.
Those covered by the Act on Support and Service for Certain Persons with Disabilities, LSS, may be entitled to personal assistance and assistance compensation. The purpose of personal assistance and other interventions is, according to the Act, to promote equality in living conditions and full participation in social life for persons with major and permanent disabilities. For the vast majority of those entitled to assistance, personal assistance means freedom, self-determination, and a better life. Personal assistance also means an opportunity to control who shall perform the assistance and in what way it shall be carried out.
As the Member of Parliament writes, the government has tasked Försäkringskassan with taking measures aimed at preventing individuals from becoming liable for repayment. Within the framework of the assignment, Försäkringskassan has developed an action plan for how the agency intends to prevent individuals from becoming liable for repayment, increase the capacity to handle reports of changed circumstances, strengthen the capacity to reclaim incorrect payments, and increase the repayment of incorrectly paid benefits.
Försäkringskassan shall, throughout the year, starting on 25 April 2025, report the results of the work being carried out as a consequence of the action plan.
The Government considers personal assistance to be a freedom reform that must be protected. This simultaneously presupposes that the system is protected against criminal exploitation. It is important that the right person receives the right compensation and that the compensation corresponds to the actual need for support. The Government has therefore decided to appoint an inquiry aimed at safeguarding the long-term sustainability and legitimacy of personal assistance.
Today, regular follow-ups of assistance compensation are missing. The absence of follow-ups means, according to Försäkringskassan, difficulties in ensuring that the right person receives the right compensation and hinders the authority from preventing crime. It also leads to the fact that the execution of incorrect decisions can continue for longer periods without being detected.
The Government considers that new forms of follow-up need to be investigated. A new system is needed to better counter incorrect payments, prevent welfare crime, and meet the individual's need for predictability and legal certainty. Through follow-up, Försäkringskassan could also better guide the assistance recipient on whether changed circumstances should be reported in order to counter incorrect payments and future repayment demands for the assistance recipient.
Today, there is a great responsibility on the individual to report changed circumstances that can affect the right to or the size of the benefit. The difficulty in interpreting the obligation to report changed circumstances has created uncertainty and unpredictability for individual assistance recipients and for assistance providers regarding when changed circumstances need to be reported.
There is a need to increase transparency in personal assistance, both in order to counter criminal schemes and to strengthen the ability of decision-making authorities to assess the right to personal assistance and make correct decisions. Increased transparency also improves the possibility of ensuring that those who have been granted assistance have their needs met, and thus reduces the risk that individuals are left without the support they have been granted and need.
If the individual has caused an incorrect payment by failing to report changed circumstances, the person is always liable for repayment. This follows from the rules in the Social Insurance Code. But according to the main rule, Försäkringskassan shall examine whether it is relevant to grant a waiver, meaning that a person who is liable for repayment can be released from paying back all or parts of the amount.
With this said, it is important that the system does not lead to unreasonable consequences. The Government is therefore following the developments in the area.
Christofer Bergenblock (C)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister Camilla Waltersson Grönvall, for the answer!
This is a question that is engaging. Let me first state that this interpellation debate is not about individuals who engage in deliberate cheating, fraud, and crime within personal assistance. All such things shall be prosecuted. The money shall be repaid, and a police report shall naturally be filed.
It is good that the government is taking further action to address fraud within personal assistance, and I welcome the investigation that the government has commissioned. But that is not what this debate is about; it is about the people who are trying to do the right thing.
It concerns both assistance recipients and assistance providers who try to live up to the requirements that are currently set in the legislation but who unfortunately, as we have been able to see in many cases, are affected by legally insecure, retroactive assessments from Försäkringskassan. One goes back in time, re-examines previous decisions or makes large reassessments of the assistance need that someone has been granted, and then one sends an invoice with a repayment demand. In many cases, the repayment demands can go back five, six, seven, eight, nine, or ten years in time and involve millions of kronor when they have accumulated over time.
Let me take an example: Maria Andersson in Karlsborg, a woman who was discovered to have a cerebral palsy during her first year of life. Since the age of four, she has had personal assistance. During her adult life, she has had personal assistance around the clock.
In 2014, she tried to attempt to work. It did not work. She was signed off sick from the workplace, and then she did not return to work. Försäkringskassan knew that she did not return to work and that the work trial was not working. It was nevertheless a good effort by Maria to enter the working life despite the situation she was in, with a great need for help and support all the time.
In 2024, ten years later, Försäkringskassan carried out a reassessment and argued that Maria should have reported this as a significantly changed circumstance ten years earlier. In that case, the decision regarding the hours she had before the work trial, during the work trial, and after the work trial was exactly the same. Thus, no change occurred in how much assistance she received. But Försäkringskassan still felt, in the context of 2024, that it was a significantly changed circumstance and that she should have received one hour less assistance per day after she had undergone the work trial. The day before Christmas last year, she received a bill from Försäkringskassan for 1.1 million kronor.
Now I understand that the minister cannot comment on individual cases, as it is not the responsibility of a minister to do so, but this will be an illustration of how things look today. Maria is not the only one who has been affected, but it is many who have been affected – individual individuals but also assistance companies.
What I requested in my first question in the interpellation was whether the Minister is prepared to introduce an emergency stop for the reclamation activities for persons with assistance. I would like to have a clearer answer on that.
Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Mr. Speaker! Many thanks, Member, for an important interpellation! It concerns the people in society who are often the most vulnerable and fragile. I and the Member share a great commitment to ensuring that their situation becomes safer, more legally secure and functional, so that they receive the assistance they are entitled to and in need of.
It is important to note that Försäkringskassan is, to put it mildly, an important agency in this context. Försäkringskassan has the task of ensuring that there is good quality in its processing and that the right person receives the right compensation. It also has a responsibility to ensure good control and to prevent and preclude incorrect payments and benefit fraud.
The difficulty in interpreting the obligation to report changed conditions that lies with the individual has created an uncertainty and an unpredictability for both individual assistance recipients and assistance providers regarding changed conditions and how they should be reported.
If the individual has caused an incorrect payment by providing incorrect information or by failing to report, the individual is always liable for repayment according to the law. It is also important to note that in cases where a reclaim exists, it is Försäkringskassan that has the burden of proof, and the standard of proof is high.
According to the main rule, Försäkringskassan shall examine whether it is relevant to grant a waiver, that is, a person who is liable for repayment can be exempted from paying back all or part of the amount if it is seen that there are special reasons for this.
Försäkringskassan shall also contribute to the overall goal that payments from the welfare systems shall be correct, that the proportion of incorrect payments shall be reduced and that errors shall be countered. Therefore, Försäkringskassan works with information initiatives regarding the obligation to report changed circumstances, including changed circumstances that must be reported within the assistance allowance.
As previously mentioned, the government in the regulatory letter for 2025 tasked Försäkringskassan with developing an action plan on how the agency intends to counter individuals becoming liable for repayments, increase the capacity to handle reports of changed circumstances, strengthen the capacity to reclaim incorrect payments, and increase the repayment of incorrectly paid benefits.
Försäkringskassan shall report the results continuously during the year and report the results back to the government – and that starting today, in fact. On 25 April 2025, the continuous reporting of the results that Försäkringskassan shall perform will begin, and the government and I myself will, of course, follow it very closely.
Christofer Bergenblock (C)
Mr. Speaker! I thank you for the answer, but I actually perceived no answer to the question about introducing an emergency brake. It is something that has been requested.
In the same way, an emergency stop was introduced in 2017 regarding the two-year reviews at Försäkringskassan when it was seen that the review activities that Försäkringskassan was then engaged in meant that people were deprived of their assistance, or it was significantly reduced, which was not in harmony with how we legislators viewed the issue. At that time, an emergency stop was introduced.
Now, assistance organizations and the disability movement have demanded an emergency stop even regarding the recovery activities for those who have tried to do the right thing. This has received support from a number of Members of Parliament, not least within the Social Affairs Committee. Moderates and Christian Democrats, Green Party members and Left Party members, Liberals and naturally we in the Centre Party say that such an emergency stop must be considered. I would like to hear a clearer answer to that specific question from the Minister.
Overall, it is an unreasonable situation that has developed and which Försäkringskassan has ended up in. The retroactive assessments entail legal uncertainty for the individual, who finds it very difficult to assess what Försäkringskassan means by "significantly changed circumstances." Furthermore, it has been shown that one is at a legal disadvantage against Försäkringskassan – or for all intents and purposes when this occurs in the municipalities, which always have a legal department and lawyers who can navigate the legislation while the individual only has themselves to rely on. This means that this issue needs to be reviewed.
Regarding exactly this issue of "materially changed circumstances," there is a great deal of uncertainty in how Försäkringskassan applies it now and how it has been done retrospectively. It leads to uncertainty and unpredictability, to use the Minister's own words, for the individual but also for the assistance companies.
It also creates fear in many to contact Försäkringskassan when one actually should do so. This can, in turn, lead to that one accumulates additional hours for which one then becomes liable for reimbursement because one is simply worried about contacting Försäkringskassan. When it is in that way, it has naturally become completely wrong. As soon as one sees that there is something that one perhaps should talk to Försäkringskassan about, the individual must be able to do so without being afraid of the consequences.
In the assignment that the government has given to Försäkringskassan, it includes developing an action plan for, among other things, the recovery activities. This has also been developed, but Försäkringskassan does not indicate in any way in the action plan that they intend to address the underlying problem with unreasonable recoveries. New case officers have been appointed to expand the recovery activities, and that is far from the same thing. It may instead lead to even more people being subject to recoveries.
It will be very interesting to see the follow-ups of this that start today. But it is the Minister's responsibility to lead in this issue. My question therefore remains: Is the Minister prepared to look at and introduce a stop to the clawback activities as they look today?
Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Mr. Speaker! Again: It is extremely important to ensure that people in need of assistance receive the help and the support to which they are entitled and that the assistance is carried out in the manner in which it has been granted.
It is naturally extremely concerning that one feels fear in contacting the authority that is supposed to be a great support when it comes to acting correctly.
That is why the government has been very clear in its mandate to Försäkringskassan. It is about information initiatives and an increased focus on ensuring that it is correct from the start. No person should feel worried about contacting Försäkringskassan – better once too many than once too few to ensure that it is correct from the very beginning.
It is clear that the system should be both predictable and legally secure. That is one reason why the government is now working on the nationalization of assistance – another matter that the entire chamber has agreed on since the Social Democrats announced some time ago that they are also positive towards precisely a nationalization of personal assistance.
Part of that reform is about making the system more legally secure. One should not feel that one is in some kind of municipal prison, but we should have assessments that are long-term and legally secure and cover all persons with personal assistance, regardless of which zip code they have.
The mandate to Försäkringskassan is very clear, so the government is acting on exactly what the member is raising. From today onwards, it will be reported back to the government on an ongoing basis on how this mandate is progressing.
I also want to highlight that we see today that the fact that there are no regular follow-ups of the assistance has caused major problems. It is linked to crime, but what affects me most is that we see that it is often those who are most in need of support and help who are most exploited in this system.
Therefore, the investigation's proposal to conduct follow-ups in a way for which there is currently a lack of support to ensure that this type of reimbursements and follow-ups will be countered. I see several positive parts in this investigation, which I also hear the member supports. It pleases me immensely.
A number of different measures are being taken today to ensure more legally secure, long-term and predictable assistance.
Christofer Bergenblock (C)
Mr. Speaker! I would like to once again thank the Minister for the contribution and address this matter regarding follow-ups.
I share the view that we need to return to a situation with follow-ups where they occur continuously but differentiated. That is to say that depending on the situation for the individual, follow-ups with different intervals are needed. If one has recently received assistance, perhaps follow-ups are needed quite closely to correct so that one reaches the right level. If one has conditions that will not change over time, they need to be done less frequently.
It is good that this is being investigated. Now, that investigation will not be finished until January 2027. There is quite a long way to go until then. I still want to say that what needs to be clarified before the investigation concludes that we need to do follow-ups again is the view on basic needs. That was the problem when an emergency stop was put on the two-year reviews in 2017: Försäkringskassan had changed its view on basic needs in the needs assessments. That is also a prerequisite for us to be able to proceed with a nationalization of the assistance, so we need to conduct a review of the assessment of basic needs.
Overall, the review activities as they are today create great uncertainty. I will closely follow what Försäkringskassan answers regarding the assignment they received from the government. Personal assistance is about freedom, self-determination and participation and is extremely important for Maria, as I mentioned earlier, and many other people.
My final question to the Minister is: How will the Minister proceed from the debate here today?
Statsrådet Camilla Waltersson Grönvall (M)
Mr. Speaker! I thank Member Christofer Bergenblock for this interpellation debate.
Just the importance of self-determination, freedom and participation is something our parties agreed on when this legislation was put in place in the early 1990s. We shared the view that persons in need of special support should be given this to increase their participation and so that they could take part in our common society.
Therefore, it is not the two-year reviews that were stopped in 2017–2018 that we are talking about in the investigation that is now starting. It is about the possibility of having regular follow-ups linked to different life situations – perhaps moving from child to adult – and that there is an opportunity to conduct follow-ups both to ensure that these assistance payments are not paid out to criminals and so that the most vulnerable do not suffer. We have seen many examples of them suffering very badly.
It is therefore important to take a collective grip on establishing a nationalization of assistance. The work in the assignment that Försäkringskassan has received to work with an action plan regarding, among other things, reimbursements begins today and shall be reported continuously. The member says that he will follow this closely; the responsible minister shall also do so. I will, of course, have very clear and close contact with Försäkringskassan linked to this assignment.
The purpose is that people in need of assistance should be able to feel a sense of security that they will receive it. There must also be clear information about when one is entitled to this.
We are continuing to work from the government's side to increase safety and legal certainty within this system.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.