Response to interpellation 2024/25:652 on a new system for short-term work

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! Ingela Nylund Watz has asked me if there is any assessment of how tax revenues and state expenditures are affected by the use of the system for short-term work or alternatively by refraining from using the current system for short-term work. She has also asked me if I and the government intend to present the proposal that exists for new legislation for a more predictable, simplified and strengthened regulatory framework for short-term work.

The world economy is in an uncertain economic situation. It affects Sweden's economy. The government therefore supports the economy with over 70 billion kronor in this year's budgets. These are important measures that keep the economic wheels turning.

Sweden has a functioning support system for short-term work. Companies that fall into temporary and serious economic difficulties can apply to Skatteverket for support for short-term work. It is then Skatteverket that decides whether the company shall receive support.

The report that the interpellor refers to is being prepared in the Government Offices. The Government has so far not proceeded with the proposals presented in the report. Several of the proposals do not improve the support's construction and involve, for example, a risk that it becomes easier for companies to issue dividends while the company receives the taxpayers' money.

In the uncertain global economic situation we are in, it is important to remember that Sweden stands stable. We have a low public debt, which many countries in Europe are envious of. It gives us financial muscles that can support the economy.

If the economic situation were to worsen, we do not rule out taking further measures.

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

Ingela Nylund Watz (S)

Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Minister for Finance!

Last week, Volvo Cars laid off 3,000 employees. Of those, 1,200 employees in Sweden are to be let go. It is a telling example of how what is happening in the global economy now has direct consequences for jobs and growth here at home in Sweden.

Sweden is already struggling today when it comes to growth. We have half a million unemployed. Bankruptcies continue to remain at a very high level. And industrial investments are being put on hold. The tough economic situation of recent years and the weak economic development in Sweden have erased ten years of real wage increases. At the same time, everything has become more expensive – food, rents, interest rates, and everything else.

For many, this has meant being forced to pinch every penny. For some, especially single parents, it is not enough to pinch every penny. They are forced to take measures such as letting the children eat first and then eating the crumbs themselves, if anything is left, or not eating at all. Some are forced to take out payday loans to afford to buy food for the whole month.

At the same time as the cost crisis continues, the world around us is becoming increasingly restless. When tariffs are introduced, the rules-based world order is threatened, and the economy slows down, it is once again ordinary people who pay the price. Now, unemployment risks rising even further. Then we can assume that prices risk going up from already high levels. Anxiety is spreading in society right now, while the government deliberately allows the gaps to widen by prioritizing those with the highest incomes over ordinary people.

In such a time, one of the government's primary tasks is to take the lead and safeguard the security of society. But what is the government doing? Well, far too little. In my opinion, the SD-government is far too passive, and it lacks crisis awareness. The Prime Minister has said that we, as a prescription for the crisis, should have patience. That is not enough. There are actually things we can do to protect Swedish jobs and companies.

Reforming the system for short-term work is such a concrete measure that would increase Sweden's competitiveness. But from the Finance Minister's answer to my interpellation, I am forced to realize that the government is quite uninterested and complacent, despite the fact that there is a fully investigated proposal that the Social Democratic government developed. Both industry, unions, and employers wish to have it in place as soon as possible.

Madam Speaker! The Minister for Finance says in his response that the proposal is being prepared in the Government Offices but that it has not been moved forward because it is considered that it does not improve the construction of the support and that there is a risk that it would become easier for companies to issue dividends and at the same time receive tax money.

Madam Speaker! The Government has had three years – three years! – to rectify the potential flaws that are considered to exist in the proposal, but so far it does not seem that the Government has done anything about this. It seems as if the preparation of the proposal will take an eternity. It simply appears as if the Government lacks the will and is unable to fulfill the task of protecting Swedish export industry.

My question to the Minister for Finance is: Will there be a proposal for a changed short-term system, and if so, when?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you, Ingela Nylund Watz, for a very good question, which is good to discuss!

The short answer is that Sweden has a system for short-term work, which we used during the pandemic. There is also another system, which was introduced in 2013, which we do not have running in that way. But we do, therefore, have systems for short-term work. I will come back to that.

I agree with much of what the interpellor mentioned in their post. It is a worrying time in many ways. It is geopolitically unstable. Therefore, we, all parties here in the Riksdag, are making enormous investments together to build Swedish defense capability. In just three or four years, the defense appropriations will double.

There are also discussions about doing even more. Those who will be at the NATO Summit will discuss that, but the parties here in the Riksdag will also discuss it. It is pleasing that we have such great consensus. It is truly about safety for the population. A government's absolutely most important task must always be to ensure that those who live in the country can be safe.

It is also about economic security, just as the interpellor pointed out. In difficult times, one should feel that one can receive support. And those who have it the toughest have received support in various ways during these years.

It is also about the uncertainty of whether one will keep one's job.

Madam Speaker! At the end of last year, we saw that the recovery began to gain momentum and that the negative trend was broken. Then Donald Trump took office as president. The only constant regarding him right now seems to be that every week or on a daily basis he changes opinions or levels of tariffs towards different countries. That unpredictability and uncertainty is the most harmful thing for both the Swedish and global economy right now. All of us in the chamber who are pro-free trade hope that this will be dampened and come to an end. But we will probably have to live with a considerable amount of tariffs in the years ahead.

Despite this, Madam Speaker, I want to assert with determination that we in Sweden have the economic muscles to do more if the recession deepens and continues or if another shock or another crisis occurs. We have experienced many in recent years. We then have good opportunities to do more.

We are following the developments closely. The budget we laid out for this year contained various supports and initiatives for 70 billion. The focus there is on growth, infrastructure, education and research, but also on strengthening the wallets of ordinary wage earners. For two years in a row, Madam Speaker, the Moderate-led government has lowered taxes for everyone who works.

What is the conclusion then? Do we need to further change the existing system for short-term work or is a new one needed? I am not as convinced as the interpellator, but I do not rule it out. However, we have a functioning support today, and companies can apply for it from Skatteverket. During the recent period, not many have done so. That may be because we have a completely different situation now than the one companies faced during the pandemic. We have a functioning system, and it has improved since the pandemic because there were deficiencies in it.

We have, as said, so far not presented any proposal, and I am also not sure that we will do so, but it does not exclude it.

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

Ingela Nylund Watz (S)

Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Finance for the comments.

On March 7 this year, six representatives for the industrial parties wrote a debate article in which they called for a new system for short-term work. They argued that the experiences from the pandemic show that today's system is not competitive in relation to the rest of the world for handling an extensive crisis. They put forward that it was needed to strengthen the competitiveness of Swedish industry and to secure jobs and Swedish export values. They strongly urged the government to make reality of the proposal that the Social Democratic government put forward.

Madam Speaker! Previous crises have taught us how important a functioning system for short-time work is. During the financial crisis of 2008–2009, we lacked such a system, and then 100,000 industrial jobs disappeared. Sweden was one of the hardest-hit countries in the world. During the pandemic, which was the next crisis, companies could use the system for short-time work and return to normal production when the crisis was over. It prevented viable companies from being knocked out unnecessarily.

Now we stand in a new crisis of which we may have only seen the beginning, with the war in Ukraine and trade and tariff wars that threaten world trade. We have low growth, high bankruptcy levels, and high unemployment with half a million unemployed. In addition, we have had a cost crisis that persists and which affects ordinary households. They look at the future with concern and are afraid of unemployment.

It is in such times that a government needs to step forward and show decisiveness so that other countries' advantages, for example with their systems for short-term work, do not become a growth brake in Sweden. It is not the time to wait and see or to fill one's belly with ice.

Madam Speaker! In February, we Social Democrats proposed that the support for short-term work must be reformed. That the state, for a period, steps in and covers a portion of companies' wage costs is not about keeping unprofitable companies afloat, but about prioritizing companies that have a need to reduce working hours during a specific period. We want to see a system where money is not paid out in advance, where it becomes difficult to receive support if one has been convicted of a crime, and where Skatteverket is given the opportunity to better monitor the companies.

When the Finance Minister presented the spring budget on April 15, it received the epithet "wait-and-see budget." The Finance Minister did indeed say in connection with the presentation of the spring budget that there have probably never been as many risks in the economy as we see now and that we have a trade war that we have never experienced before. These are correct observations by the Finance Minister, but the problem is that no proposals and measures are coming that respond to the situation. We are doing too little ourselves to remedy the crisis.

What is the government's message to wage earners and companies in Swedish industrial towns? What message does the government have for the six representatives of the export industry who wrote the debate article? Does the Finance Minister see any threats to the competitiveness of Swedish industry at all, and if so, what does the government want to do about them? If the government does not want a renewed, improved system for short-term work, what does the government want to do instead?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker! Thank you again for the questions, Ingela Nylund Watz! I am happy to explain what we want and what we do.

Passive is the last thing this government is! From day one on the job, we have pushed down the 10 percent inflation that we inherited. We have worked to strengthen and support households in a very difficult time. My view is that we will need to do more. But in the budget that applies for this year, we have ensured that measures are taken regarding such things as Swedish business and Swedish companies, small as large, have asked for most of all: better infrastructure and research and development. We have improved the experts tax and the research and development deduction and also much more. That makes it so that Sweden can become more competitive in a tough environment.

Madam Speaker! If the proposal for an entirely new system would solve some of the difficulties for competitiveness in Sweden, I would not have hesitated. But there is no conflict here. We actually already have two systems for short-term work. One was decided in 2013, and a government must first activate it. It was decided by the government I sat in. Then we have the system that was used during the pandemic. Was it perfect? No. It was changed slightly along the way and has also been changed afterwards. But we have a system, and it is possible to apply for support. Therefore, there is no conflict. I do, however, have full respect for the fact that one may think it should be redone even more. I also have a lot of contact with both business representatives and trade union representatives on this issue and on many others.

Madam Speaker! Let me say something briefly about what the government is doing for households. I have already mentioned some things that we are doing to strengthen growth and improve the business climate.

Since we took office, we have lowered the tax for everyone who works. Thanks to our budgets, a police officer or a nurse has 23,000 kronor more in 2025 than in 2023. Money is also security, Madam Speaker.

On August 1, we are raising the cash ceiling. We have lowered the tax on fuels and changed the reduction obligation so that today it is 500–600 kronor cheaper to fuel your car than it was when we took office. We have supported those who have the least through housing allowances – both extended and increased. We have lowered the tax on savings. Additionally, I want to mention that we have removed receipt complications for companies. The latter does not apply to households, Madam Speaker, but very many small business owners are happy about it.

Step by step, reform by reform and budget by budget is my goal and the government's focus to strengthen Swedish growth. We will do what is necessary so that companies in Sweden, small as well as large, will want to grow and invest here and so that households – people living all around Sweden – will feel secure. I understand that one does not always do so just now. Very much has become expensive due to high inflation, which has now been pressed down. In addition, we have an American president who changes the message almost every day. It creates uncertainty and anxiety.

If I am to add a third thing, Germany appears to be set to have zero growth for the third year in a row, which I will touch upon in the next debate. Germany is one of Sweden's absolutely most important markets.

We live in uncertain times, but the Swedish economy stands strong. The Moderate-led government is doing everything it can, day by day, to get growth moving seriously, so that Sweden becomes competitive and so that households' purchasing power is strengthened.

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

Ingela Nylund Watz (S)

Madam Speaker! The Minister for Finance says that she is keen to protect the household economy for the families who have it the hardest. Is that why the Minister for Finance and the Moderate-led SD government are removing the extra housing supplement for single parents – those who have it the hardest in Sweden – from July 1, precisely when the summer half-year begins. Then they will no longer be able to afford to go on outings or add any extra gold trim to life for themselves and their children.

Exactly then, with surgical precision, the Finance Minister makes it harder for many single parents to manage to put food on the table. I do not think it is a sign that the government takes the households' finances particularly seriously.

Let me return to the need for the reformed short-term support. The problem is not that we have a short-term support today. The problem is that it is not judged to be particularly competitive with other countries' short-term support.

That is why the representatives of industry and the union demand and wish from the government: Put a new system in place, so that we do not find ourselves caught off guard if the crisis worsens!

The Minister for Finance radiates in today's debate with all the desired clarity that it is a complacent stance one has. One does not want to redo and reform the system and ensure that we get a more competitive system. One swings around that if the situation becomes worse, one can consider this.

My point is that the system must be in place before it gets worse. When it gets worse, perhaps thousands of jobs have already been lost. It is now that we need a reformed short-term support. It is now the government needs to act and stop waiting and seeing.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Madam Speaker and the interpellor!

Sometimes I wonder. I know Ingela Nylund Watz as a wise person. We have sat in committees together for many years. The point is that we have a functioning short-term support system.

Then one can have different opinions about that. But that was what we used during the pandemic, and Sweden got out of it better than many other countries. We got back on track faster.

Our short-term support system worked. Was it perfect? No. We have also addressed several of the things that did not work. One has to choose whether or not to proceed with what Ingela Nylund Watz is now raising.

My point is that Sweden has a system, and it is not uncompetitive. When we now talk about competitiveness, one must nevertheless say that the most important thing we can do for the Swedish companies is to give them the right conditions.

It is about not raising taxes when others do so, so that investments do not disappear to other countries. It is a matter of us ensuring that we do what we can to ensure that wage earners and companies are paid for their toil and their effort so that more jobs can be created here.

When one becomes unemployed, as now at Volvo or in other places, and when one is hit hard by Trump's tariffs, there must be support and help to move forward. That is the case both for individuals and for companies, including the support that the debate here has been about.

Madam Speaker! There is a support. One can have different opinions about it. But it works, and one can apply for it at Skatteverket.

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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