Response to interpellation 2025/26:19 on state presence and the closure of the Swedish Tax Agency in Simrishamn

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! The sun is shining, a Friday in November, and we are going to debate several important matters.

Anna Wallentheim has asked the Minister for Civil Affairs if he intends to take measures to stop the closure of the Swedish Tax Agency's office in Simrishamn and ensure that state workplaces and services are preserved and developed throughout the country, even in smaller towns and in rural municipalities. The interpellation has been handed over to me.

The government's administrative policy is based on the authorities themselves, to a large extent, deciding how the operations shall be organized to best meet the collective needs of society, based on the goals and tasks for the operations that the Riksdag and the government establish. This means that it is largely the authorities that are responsible for deciding on their organization and the geographical division of their operations. At the same time, it is important that our authorities are present in several places in Sweden, as state presence maintains the legitimacy and trust of the state administration.

According to its instructions, the Swedish Tax Agency shall conduct activities at the locations justified by its tasks. After the relocation of the Simrishamn office, the Swedish Tax Agency has remaining processing activities in 44 locations across Sweden, from Malmö to Kiruna. The work regarding premises procurement is an important prerequisite for being able to create an efficient and purposeful operation. That is the reason why the Swedish Tax Agency is moving its operations from Simrishamn to Malmö.

It is the agency's management that is best positioned to decide how the organization should be designed and where it should be geographically located to create an efficient and purposeful operation.

I have great respect for the fact that individuals and local communities are affected by decommissioning decisions. At the same time, it is important to emphasize that individual office closures do not provide the full picture of the development of the state's presence in the country. It is true that there are decommissionings and reductions of state activities in the country, but the state is growing and establishing itself in other respects as a result of the government's investments in other areas.

The Government monitors the distribution of state jobs in the country and assesses that there are good conditions to make assessments and trade-offs when issues of localization arise.

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

Anna Wallentheim (S)

Mr. Speaker! It is a bit special to stand here today. It is now November, and I submitted the questions to the Minister for Civil Affairs in September. But I am, of course, grateful that the Minister for Finance is here and answering the questions today. It will be extra special, as this very Friday I would have been in Simrishamn, because we have a constituency meeting at home.

For a long time, we have seen the state presence weaken step by step in smaller towns and in the countryside. It does not happen through a major decision but usually gradually, an office here and a service office there, until people suddenly notice that the state is no longer present.

A current example, which we are debating here today, is that the Skatteverket office in Simrishamn is to be closed. It is an office where 42 people work today. Many of them have high specialized competence that is used nationally. It is also one of the municipality's largest workplaces and has for decades contributed to both the state and Simrishamn as a community.

Mr. Speaker! This was an announcement that came quite suddenly. The staff were informed that the office would be closed but were not given the opportunity to provide comments or suggest solutions. The municipality was also not informed in advance, even though it concerns one of the largest employers in the municipality.

For the employees, the decision means that they can now start commuting to the offices in either Malmö or Kristianstad. This can involve up to four hours of commuting per day. We all know what that means. In practice, people will be forced to either move from Simrishamn or quit.

However, this is not just about the Swedish Tax Agency. This year, the State Service Office in Simrishamn has also been closed. This means that people in the municipality who need help with pension matters, sickness insurance, or simpler contacts with authorities now have to travel to other locations.

Mr. Speaker! Simrishamn is a municipality where 30 percent of the inhabitants are over 65 years old. They have the oldest population in Skåne. These are people who have built up our country, who have worked and paid tax their entire lives, but they are now being told that the state is no longer available for them. They are told: "Now you have to manage on your own or travel mile after mile to get help." It is undignified.

It may be difficult for people in large cities to understand what it means when an office is closed down. But in Simrishamn, it is not just about an authority. It is also about security, about contact with the state, about job opportunities, and about faith in the future.

The Swedish Tax Agency itself says that the decision is based on local supply or competence supply. But in Simrishamn, the staff turnover was low. There is long experience and a stable competence.

Mr. Speaker! State presence is not just a question of economics. It is also a question of justice, respect, and trust. The state should not only be there where it is most profitable. It should be there where people live.

The question to the Minister for Finance is therefore simple: Where is the limit for how much of the state can disappear from the countryside before the government says stop?

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

Adrian Magnusson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I could give the exact same description as Member Wallentheim just did of the staff's competence, the importance of the Swedish Tax Agency's operations for Simrishamn as a locality, and the importance of state presence all around the country. The Minister for Finance says himself that it is about legitimacy. Right now, many feel that the state's legitimacy is decreasing when such a large employer disappears from a locality like Simrishamn.

Simrishamn is a locality that over the last 30 years has experienced several types of state withdrawal. Once upon a time, it had its own police chief and was its own police district. It had its own district court, insurance agency, employment service, and tax agency. Today, only the Tax Agency remains, which is one of the municipality's largest employers. But now that agency's office is to be closed.

I want to focus a bit on the government's administrative policy in general and the government's view on the agencies and how they should be governed. We have had several debates in the chamber with Erik Slottner regarding Statens servicecenter. There, the message to us Members of Parliament who have had views on the closures of the service centers around the country has been that this is not a matter for the government but a matter for the agency itself – the agency decides where the offices shall be located.

I and the Minister for Finance have previously had a debate about the closure of the Swedish Tax Agency's office in Lund. The message then was roughly the same: This is not a matter for the government but a matter for the agency itself. Shortly thereafter, the Swedish Tax Agency also closed the office in Enköping, and now the office in Simrishamn is being closed.

The Instrument of Government states quite clearly that it is the government that governs the realm. It does not say that the government governs the realm when the government feels like it or in cases where the government wants to, but it says that the government governs the realm. When the Minister for Finance speaks about the legitimacy of the state and the importance of the state being present in more places around the country, I think it becomes a bit striking when the Minister for Finance in the next breath says that these are issues for the Swedish Tax Agency and for the authorities themselves.

This question has attracted great attention and criticism, I must say, in southeastern Skåne, where I come from. Several letters to the editor and large reports have been published in the local newspaper, and municipal politicians have been very engaged in the issue. In recent days, a letter to the editor from some managers at Skatteverket was published on Ystads Allehanda's website, which I can find a bit special. I think the government should be held accountable all the way because one does not govern the agency. In the letter, it is written, for example, that the governance of agencies mainly occurs through instructions and regulatory letters from the government. Skatteverket's own managers are thus clear that these are actually government matters.

The government could have stopped the closure of the office in Simrishamn if it had wanted to. It has been done before. This is not a new issue. Ten years ago, there were a number of Skatteverket offices around the country that were threatened with closure. It was the government's actions that made the management at Skatteverket eventually decide not to proceed with the closure plans.

The government is responsible for ensuring that there are state jobs throughout the country. The government cannot shrug off that task whenever it feels like it but must be able to bear the responsibility all the way. If the government truly believes that the state should have legitimacy in all parts of the country and not just in Malmö, Gothenburg, Stockholm and the metropolitan areas, the government must act when it sees that the management at various agencies is closing down agency offices around our country.

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the interpellor for a very important question that touches on many levels. I fully share the interpellor's basic position that it actually concerns two issues. One concerns the feeling throughout the country when the state sometimes changes, closes down, or moves operations. One can feel abandoned or feel that it is only the large cities that matter. The other issue concerns the employees in Simrishamn at this specific authority, namely Skatteverket, for which I have responsibility.

Let me back up a bit. As I was clear about in the answer, there is an instruction for Skatteverket, as well as for other agencies, to conduct activities in the places where it is justified by the tasks. The state has a responsibility to be present all over the country. I have had the pleasure – even though it has sometimes been tough – of moving around quite a bit in Sweden and living in both large and small municipalities. It is completely obvious that the question of the state's presence affects very many.

It is always a balancing act when operations change. We know, for example, that the Swedish Tax Agency has now, over a couple of decades, moved much more towards digitalization and efficiency, which many citizens appreciate, whether they live in Lycksele, Malmö, or Stockholm. But it is also the case that not all citizens are fully digitized. It is always a balancing act.

Mr. Speaker! I believe that the previous government, if it had been asked the same question five years ago, would have answered in approximately the same way as I: It would not be entirely optimal if the government were to step in and govern exactly which offices the Swedish Tax Agency or other authorities should have in different locations. I trust to a very large extent that the agency management makes the overall assessment.

As I said, technology and operations change partly. That also means that authorities may need to reorganize. In this case, my answer is no – I do not intend to, shall not, and am not allowed to dictate exactly where the Swedish Tax Agency should have every single one of its offices. But I fully and completely share the view that this is an issue that is large and important for very many.

As I also said briefly in the interpellation answer, I think one should turn the question about the state's presence somewhat. One must not forget that the state is also growing in very many places in the form of everything from the Prison and Probation Service to the defense. Activities are growing in some places and becoming smaller in others, but my firm opinion is that the state's total presence is not small out in the country right now. This applies to both agencies and other things.

There are, therefore, two sides to the coin. State authorities are growing and expanding operations in many places, but in other places, they are withdrawing. This has an impact and costs money. I am definitely keeping an eye on the authorities I am responsible for in the government, for example Skatteverket, Tullverket, and Kronofogdemyndigheten, so that they reach the goals and follow the instructions.

But to decide exactly where an agency should have its offices is a matter for the agency's management, and I perceive that there is, fundamentally, quite a large consensus regarding this in the chamber of the Riksdag.

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

Anna Wallentheim (S)

Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for Finance for the answer. It may not have been exactly the answer I had hoped for, even though there is, of course, much in it that is important. It is important that we have trust in the authorities.

I am a member of the Committee on Justice and I know that the Prison and Probation Service is growing and needs to grow across the entire country, just as the Minister mentions. However, it can never compensate for the fact that people's services are disappearing. That is much of what we are talking about today. It is very good that the state is growing in certain places, and it is good that people get jobs and employment opportunities. But the fact is that much of the service that people demand is disappearing.

It therefore becomes clear that the government is trying to dodge responsibility in this issue. The Minister for Finance has said that it is important that agencies are located in several places in Sweden. But at the same time, agencies that are to provide services to people are allowed to decide for themselves where they should be located.

It is not a law of nature that authorities must be centralized. It is a matter of a political choice. In 2015, we faced the same situation. The Swedish Tax Agency planned then to close offices in Simrishamn, Ängelholm, Vetlanda, Mariestad, and several other municipalities. But the then Social Democratic government, with Civil Minister Ardalan Shekarabi at the helm, actually chose to act. He tasked Statskontoret with following up on the location of state authorities. The decisions were paused, and the plans were subsequently withdrawn.

It happened then, and it happens now too – if one only has the political will. The government can rule through regulatory letters, through ordinances, and by giving agencies a clear mandate to safeguard state presence throughout the country. One can even legislate on it, for example when it concerns Systembolaget.

But instead of action, we see how government offices are being closed one by one. People are then left without service. Skåne has been quite heavily affected recently. Skatteverket has closed offices in Simrishamn, Eslöv, Trelleborg, Landskrona and Lund, just to name a few.

Mr. Speaker! For a municipality like Simrishamn, this is a hard blow. If one loses 42 jobs, one loses much more than just that. One loses purchasing power. One loses the basis for public transport. One loses faith in the future for young families. One also loses important collaborations between the state and the municipality.

The municipality is already working against the wind. Simrishamn is a municipality with an aging population. It also has an incredibly strong seasonal labor market and major challenges with welfare. When the state chooses to leave the municipality instead of staying, it sends a very clear but sad message, namely that people in smaller localities do not count as much.

Simrishamn is a part of Sweden. Those who live there pay tax just like everyone else. They have the right to state services, and they have the same right to feel that the state is near them. The state's presence is not a cost. It is an investment in trust, equality, and cohesion. When people feel that the state is where they live and that authorities are accessible and understand their reality, trust in democracy is also strengthened.

Mr. Speaker! I want to see a government that takes responsibility and does not hide behind agency decisions, but stands up for the idea of a Sweden that holds together. It is a government that says: We shall have a state presence in the entire country, and also in Simrishamn.

If one cannot do anything about the offices that have already been closed or are planned to be closed in Skåne, can the Minister for Finance instead say that no more offices shall be closed and that one stands up for presence throughout the entire country?

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

Adrian Magnusson (S)

Mr. Speaker! I want to turn to some of the things that the Minister for Finance said in his speech. There is no consensus on this issue. Anna Wallentheim has meritiously set out.

The previous Social Democratic government acted when the leadership of the Swedish Tax Agency (Skatteverket) announced that they would close a number of offices in the locations that Member of Parliament Wallentheim mentioned and also a number of other locations, for example Lycksele, which the Finance Minister himself mentioned in his first speech.

It is possible to do something else. It is possible to act. Systembolaget exists throughout the entire country, and it is a clear instruction. Had the government wanted there to be state jobs all around the country, one could have acted.

It is the same thing with Statens servicecenter. There, the government has been extremely passive during the entire wave of closures that has hit Statens servicecenter so far and which may continue. We will have to see where that development leads.

The Minister for Finance spoke in his second speech about digitalization. Digitalization has become a kind of general concept so that one can say that the state does not need to be present everywhere. It is digitalization that makes it possible to close offices.

If one thinks about it a bit, one might think that it should be the other way around. Why should one do as the Swedish Tax Agency itself accounts for here? Someone should have asked the management of the Swedish Tax Agency why it is so important to gather the staff in Malmö and Kristianstad if one now has a digitalization and can instead be seen digitally, have training digitally and work in teams digitally.

Why is it then so important that the staff in the agency are gathered in Malmö and Kristianstad? One should be able to have the agency in more locations instead of fewer, if one were to take the possibilities of digitalization seriously.

I want to conclude by asking two questions. I want to ask the Minister for Finance: Where in Simrishamn is the state growing? I am in Simrishamn sometimes, and I do not see it. I also want to ask the Minister for Finance: Where is the limit for when the minister thinks the government can act against the phasing out of state jobs around the country?

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

Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)

Mr. Speaker! I will soon return to the matter at hand. What the government is doing is taking responsibility for Sweden and the whole of Sweden. I will just first say something briefly about the Swedish Tax Agency.

The Swedish Tax Agency is located in 44 places around the country. It is an agency that, in all measurements, enjoys a high level of trust. It has been ahead of many other agencies in creating service. With all that said, I understand that there are also many who find it troublesome when a tax office is closed or moved. In this case, it is about Skåne retaining the jobs. They will be in southern Sweden but not in Simrishamn.

Let me say something about responsibility for the countryside. I do not know if any government in modern times has increased, and will increase, the state's presence as much as the government does. We are expanding the police. We also did that in opposition when the Social Democrats' budget sometimes fell and ours won.

We ensured that the police received more resources and that the customs received more resources. Now the defense is growing all around throughout Sweden. We can look at the citizens who today are completely dependent on their car. If one lives in a sparsely populated area or rural area, it is 500–600 kronor cheaper to fuel one's car now. We make it possible to live in the countryside.

I fully understand that one might think that this particular office should remain. It is not an individual issue for a minister. I follow the issue of the state's presence very closely and carefully, also when it concerns all the service agencies.

I can state that the budgets that I have placed on the floor of the Riksdag have led and will lead to a greater and increased presence and more job opportunities within the state all around the country. Furthermore, we are making it easier for people to live in sparsely populated areas and rural areas, while the previous government made it more expensive and more difficult.

Mr. Speaker! Now the debate is about the Swedish Tax Agency. I intend to conclude by saying that one fundamentally has an instruction to be in Sweden – not everywhere and in all places, but throughout the country – and to have an operation that works. But it is still the management of the Swedish Tax Agency that must decide exactly which offices shall exist and where they shall be located.

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

Anna Wallentheim (S)

Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Finance, for the answer!

We can well observe that we can agree to disagree. Now, the Minister for Finance mentioned, among other things, how the state is increasing its presence in the country and how it is growing. But the fact is that even police stations have been closed down during recent years.

What is happening in Simrishamn right now is unfortunately not an isolated case. It is part of a development where the state is step by step withdrawing from smaller towns and rural areas. That decision is made far away from people's everyday lives, without dialogue and without regard for the consequences.

The state's presence is not just about premises and offices. It is about trust. People should feel that the state is there where they live. They should feel that they get help when they need it and that their locality counts just as much as the rest of Sweden.

When Skatteverket, Försäkringskassan, or Arbetsförmedlingen leave the area, it is not just the jobs that disappear. Then, the security, the belief in the future, and a part of the collective social construction disappear.

Mr. Speaker! We Social Democrats believe that the state has a responsibility to be present not only where it is profitable but where people are. We want to see a government that takes that responsibility, directs the authorities to be present throughout the entire country, safeguards state services close to people, and ensures that the state presence is an investment in trust and cohesion.

A Sweden that holds together is not built in the big cities. It is built in every municipality, in every town, and in places where people live their lives. People must feel that the state stands by their side.

(FIRST DEPUTY SPEAKER: The Minister for Finance waives his final word.)

The interpellations debate was hereby concluded.

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