Response to interpellation 2025/26:322 on the Consumer Agency's resources and responsibilities
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD argues that the Consumer Agency has the scope to handle its tasks within existing resources 1 2 3. KD emphasizes that money is a finite resource where the state's core activities are prioritized 2 3 4 and that the agency must make reprioritizations and use method development, for example AI, to become more efficient 2 3 4. KD argues that it is not possible to meet all needs without raising taxes 3 and is not particularly worried about the two new laws 4. S argues that the government does not give the agency real opportunities to fulfill its mandates and that new mandates without additional resources risk crowding out other supervision 5 6. S proposes increased funding for more controls, AI competence, and sanctions 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.
Civilministern Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! Anna-Belle Strömberg has asked me whether I assess that the Consumer Agency's current resources and mandate are in proportion to the tasks resulting from ongoing and upcoming consumer policy reforms, such as the distance contracts bill and the new Consumer Credit Act. She has asked whether I and the government intend to provide the Consumer Agency with increased resources to enable more active, preventive, and effective supervision – particularly within the digital markets, the credit area, and the work against misleading business practices.
She has also asked whether I intend to take the initiative to give the Consumer Agency an expanded and clearer supervisory responsibility in areas where supervision is currently fragmented, unclear, or insufficient. Finally, she has asked how I and the government ensure that the new consumer protection rules that have now been decided upon do not remain as mere legal text but actually lead to strengthened protection for consumers in practice.
Just as Anna-Belle Strömberg notes, the pace of reform in the consumer area is high. A number of new and revised legal acts have been negotiated within the EU and are now to be implemented in Swedish law. It is pleasing that consumer protection will thereby be strengthened.
New legislation needs to be accompanied by conditions for effective implementation. The business community may need support to understand and apply its new obligations, and the relevant supervisory authorities need resources, mandates, and access to effective methods to be able to exercise necessary supervision.
In every individual legislative matter, the Government makes an assessment of any potential need for additional resources. In the legislative products that Anna-Belle Strömberg mentions, where the Consumer Agency is given a supervisory responsibility in several cases, the Government has judged that the agency has the capacity to handle its task with existing resources. The Government will shortly receive the agency's budget basis with an assessment of any potential need for additional resources. This basis always constitutes an important basis for the Government's assessment of whether the Consumer Agency has sufficient resources to handle its tasks.
Anna-Belle Strömberg (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for Civil Affairs for the answer.
My interpellation concerns the proportions between a rapidly growing regulatory framework and the actual conditions for managing to implement it in practice. I also think it is pleasing that we are taking steps to improve consumer protection.
The Minister confirms himself that the pace of reform in the consumer area is high. EU regulations are to be implemented, new national legislation is to be decided, and the Consumer Agency receives an expanded supervisory responsibility in several cases. The Minister also says something important, namely that new legislation needs to be followed by resources, by mandates, and by effective methods. We completely agree on all of that.
But the problem, Madam Speaker, is that despite this, the government states that the Consumer Agency, in connection with the reforms, shall be able to handle its tasks within existing resources. This is where the question marks accumulate for me. In its budget documents for 2026–2028, the Consumer Agency has been clear that the authority faces an increased number of supervisory tasks, more complex cases in digital and cross-border markets, and a growing need for competence in digital analysis and AI. Even in the Consumer Agency's report on influencers and marketing, the authority states that the business methods are very problematic and that violations occur on a large scale. Unserious companies systematically push the boundaries, and children and young people are particularly vulnerable. The problems persist.
The question is whether the state truly gives the authority real opportunities to fulfill its mandates. The Consumer Agency describes that new mandates without additional resources risk displacing other supervision. Against this background, it is not enough to say that each legislative matter is assessed individually, as appeared from the Minister's answer. The consumer does not encounter the reforms individually but as a whole. In that whole, the supervision is already severely strained.
Madam Speaker! Do you judge that the minister is correct that the new assignments, without additional resources, risk displacing other supervision?
Civilministern Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! Just the new legislative proposals mentioned in the bill are not on my desk, but it is State Secretary Strömmer who has submitted the bill to the Riksdag. But the assessment has nevertheless been made that what emerges in those legislations does not necessitate a need for increased resources – that also appeared in my interpellation answer – but they can be managed within existing frameworks.
It also cannot be that every time a new bill is presented, one must always allocate new funds to the authorities. They must also, within the framework of the current fiscal year, be able to take on new tasks and make reprioritizations. We cannot have a constantly growing and swelling state. At some point, one must also reprioritize.
This is what we do every time in the budget. Money is a finite resource, and we must prioritize between different areas of activity. But it is clear that every agency must also make its own prioritizations as society changes. They also have a regulatory letter and an instruction to follow. They must, of course, work with method development to become even more efficient in their work, and I know that the Consumer Agency works a lot with that. The Agency is doing interesting work within AI to, with the help of AI, improve and become more efficient in its supervisory activities, primarily within the area of product safety. We have allocated special funds for this in this year's budget to the Consumer Agency, so that they can develop the work with AI to be able to exercise more supervision within the area of product safety legislation.
From and starting next year, we are increasing the appropriations for the Consumer Agency's consumer guidance. We see an increased need for guidance, which I think is welcome. A great deal is ongoing.
It is clear that most agencies can certainly absorb more money, especially an agency like the Consumer Agency which has an important supervisory mandate in its instructions. It is clear that one can always do even more supervision. But ultimately, it is a prioritization between many different measures that the government takes. Just as the member knows very well, a large expansion of the defense and the justice system is taking place, which pushes out some other investments. Therefore, we focus even more on the state's core activities. But we still make the assessment that the two laws that the member mentions in the interpellation can be handled within the existing framework.
Anna-Belle Strömberg (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank the Minister for the answer.
The Minister said in his response that the Consumer Agency's budget basis shall be accepted. It shall form the basis for future assessments. At the same time, the government has already established the conclusion that the agency has room within existing resources.
This stands in contrast to the assessments of the Consumer Agency and civil society. The organization Sveriges Konsumenter has been clear that unscrupulous actors often count on the risk of being scrutinized being low and that the sanctions are not always deterrent. It is exactly what we see in reality: subscription traps, misleading marketing, scam offers, aggressive digital business methods, and companies that systematically test where the boundaries lie.
In our committee motion on consumer policy, we conclude that it is not a regulatory problem but rather a matter of supervision. Therefore, in our budget, we propose an increased appropriation to Konsumentverket for more inspections, investments in new tools and AI competence, as well as more tangible sanctions so that cheating does not pay off. We have listened to Konsumentverket and the organization Sveriges Konsumenter, and we take the warnings seriously.
I will return to my question, because I do not think I received an answer. Does the Minister consider that these problems risk pushing out other supervision?
Civilministern Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! If I am not mistaken, the budget submissions come later in the spring – in May, if I remember correctly. They always constitute an important basis for the government to see what needs exist. Then it will be impossible for any government, regardless of which one, to meet all needs and requests, because then the budget would be infinite. That much money will not exist, unless we want to raise taxes significantly every year. I do not think even Anna-Belle Strömberg would think that desirable. We will never be able to fully meet the requests and needs that exist because money is a finite resource.
Naturally, these are still important bases that come in. If an agency describes that a mandate it has received from the Riksdag or that it has according to the legislation cannot be fulfilled due to a lack of resources, we must seriously consider whether more resources need to be allocated. In the end, however, it will always be a matter of prioritization between different policy areas. That which the government promised the voters in the previous election will, naturally, always be most prioritized.
For this government, the Tidö Agreement will also always be the highest priority. What has been agreed upon there will always come first in the order of priority. There is nothing strange about that.
The two pieces of legislation specifically mentioned in the interpellation are still very new. I know that one enters into force in June 2026; I am a bit more uncertain regarding the entry into force of the other. If the Consumer Agency makes the assessment that it will not be able to handle this in an acceptable way with existing resources, they can write that in their budget proposal and demand more money. Then we have to weigh these arguments and demands against other demands that come in.
Until now, we have made the assessment that no additional funds need to be allocated during 2026 to accommodate the new legislation. Accordingly, we have also made the assessment that it should not displace other supervisory activities.
Strömberg also spoke about new powers. I think one should always be open to that. For example, we have asked the Consumer Agency to come back with a report on specifically customer service. If I remember correctly, the member and I discussed this in a previous interpellation debate, where I then promised to do something. Now we have had it presented to us, and we have also received a memorandum where the Consumer Agency has proposed that they should be given more power to, for example, issue fines against companies that do not have a functioning customer service. We intend to proceed with this, and I think that is very positive.
It absolutely does not exclude that there are more areas where it is necessary to grant powers where authorities currently lack powers. Perhaps it is also necessary to grant sharper powers where authorities currently have powers so that they can carry out a more effective supervisory work. We must constantly be open to this, assign tasks, and analyze it along the way.
Regarding the economic resources, in conclusion, these are determined for each budget bill. In the 2025 budget bill, we made two main investments – one in product safety, increased supervision there and development of AI models for this, and one in increased resources for consumer guidance.
I am also convinced that the Consumer Agency, just like many other authorities, will be able to use AI to a significantly greater extent, not least when the AI workshop is more expanded. It will be able to create a significantly increased efficiency. Some of this can certainly also be used for increased supervision.
Anna-Belle Strömberg (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank you for the answer.
It feels good that one is nevertheless prepared to review the resources. I perceive, however, that there will not be more resources during 2026, even though the authority cannot carry out some assignments without pushing others aside – at least that was how I understood it.
I completely agree with the Minister that the pace of reform in the consumer area is high and that it is pleasing that steps are being taken to strengthen consumer protection.
In the interpellation answer, the minister acknowledges the need for resources for effective implementation in the future. Nevertheless, the government concludes that the Consumer Agency shall manage this within existing frameworks. This is an assumption that is not shared by the Consumer Agency in their budget basis. It is not shared by Sveriges Konsumenter, and it is not shared by us Social Democrats either.
That is exactly why we in our budget have prioritized supervision and presented proposals that shall strengthen the Consumer Agency's capacity. We believe that the responsibility cannot be pushed onto future budget bases. Consumer policy is about security in everyday life and about laws actually applying in practice.
With that, I would like to thank you for the answer and wish you a pleasant weekend.
Civilministern Erik Slottner (KD)
Madam Speaker! I completely share the assessment that laws should apply in practice, not just stand in some book and then not be complied with.
I do not rule out that the Consumer Agency receives more money for supervision, among other reasons, due to these legislations. I cannot, however, give any promises here regarding a flow of money to the Consumer Agency in this specific issue, as there are no such decisions.
There are two occasions. We still have the spring amendment budget, which is to be decided in April. There might be money there; I cannot say that today. Then, of course, we have an autumn budget to be adopted later this autumn, which will apply from 2027. What will be in it and how the Consumer Agency will be affected, we do not know at all. We do not even know which government will be in power when that budget is submitted to the Riksdag, so it becomes truly hypothetical.
Here and now, today, I cannot give any promises regarding extra funds for this. We have until now made the assessment that the new legislations can be accommodated and managed within the frameworks that currently exist. It will, of course, continue to place demands on the Consumer Agency to prioritize within its operations and work with method development to be even more efficient and use the money one has even better. The Consumer Agency is doing a good job with this today. They are also used to handling new tasks that come in continuously.
Then I understand that the authority itself wants more money, among other things for its supervisory work. It shares this with many other authorities. Money is, however, a finite resource. The government has to prioritize between different areas of activity, and this is the prioritization we have made so far.
I am, however, not particularly worried about these two new laws specifically. There are a number of other areas in the consumer field where one could wish for more supervision. Let us see what the government comes back with regarding this.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.