Response to interpellation 2025/26:329 on the resources of the Swedish Economic Crime Authority
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
M argues that the justice system's budget is growing significantly and that the Economic Crime Authority has received substantial financial supplements as well as more employees 1 2. M emphasizes that the government's priority is to choke the criminal economy through reforms such as independent forfeiture and expanded coercive measures 1. M agrees on the importance of preventive measures and informs that a financial intelligence center is already under construction 2 3. M also intends to investigate how a national center for forfeiture should be established 3. M believes that forfeiture requires a new way of working and methodology rather than just being an additional tool 3. M emphasizes that it is important to choke the criminal economy because it drives the violence 4. M argues that the Economic Crime Authority has a central role in interaction with other agencies 4. S argues that the agency's resources have practically decreased due to increased costs 5. S advocates for indexing state grants to municipalities 6. S suggests that the Economic Crime Authority be developed into a national center for forfeiture and a national financial intelligence center to identify structures before profits arise 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.
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! Lars Isacsson has asked me if I have made any analysis of how the Ekobrottsmyndigheten's savings may affect the agency's ability to handle the increasing economic crime. Furthermore, he has asked me if I have made any analysis of how the savings relate to the government's ambition to strike against the criminal economy. Finally, he has asked me what these analyses have shown.
Let me first state that for far too many years, far too little was done to stop the violence, stifle the criminal economy, and break the recruitment of children and young people into the gangs. It is a responsibility that falls heavily on the previous, Social Democratic, government.
Since we took office, we have carried out a comprehensive reorganization of the policy. The justice system's authorities have received substantial financial supplements, and the law enforcement agencies have received many new effective tools. For the entire justice system, the budget is estimated to grow from 69 billion kronor in 2023 to 108 billion kronor in 2028.
We know that economic gain is one of the biggest drivers behind organized crime. It is simply the money that feeds the criminal networks. Choking off the criminal economy is therefore one of the government's most prioritized issues. This involves, among other things, preventing the incorrect use of public funds, preventing companies from being used as tools for crime, increasing the recovery of criminal proceeds, and utilizing the potential in so-called administrative measures. All of this aims to tackle crime from several sides simultaneously.
It is about a large number of implemented reforms and measures. To take some examples: a completely new forfeiture legislation with independent forfeiture, expanded possibilities to use secret and preventive coercive measures, even in relation to serious economic crime, new legislation aimed at countering the use of companies as criminal tools, and expanded business prohibitions. Added to this is a financial intelligence center to develop cooperation between authorities and the business sector, particularly the banks, when it comes to crime linked to the financial system, such as money laundering, fraud, and other similar crimes.
We are also preparing legislation that will entail harsher penalties for economic crime, in particular for those crimes committed within the framework of criminal networks.
The Economic Crime Authority has been provided with extensive resources throughout the entire mandate period. From 2023 to 2026, the authority's appropriation has increased by just over 260 million kronor, from 953 million kronor in 2023 to just over 1.2 billion kronor in 2026. Between 2025 and 2026 alone, the appropriation increased by 53 million kronor for decided reforms. In total, the appropriation increased by 79 million kronor.
Finally, I want to point out that the Economic Crime Authority, the Swedish Police Authority, and the Swedish Prosecution Authority were tasked this summer with strengthening the authorities' collective ability to combat economic crime. The assignment is to be reported to the government now in March, and it will provide a basis for further strengthening and developing the efforts in this area.
Lars Isacsson (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank Minister of Justice Gunnar Strömmer for the answer.
In his answer, the Minister for Justice accounts for several good and important reforms that the Social Democrats have also stood behind. But I intend to devote the debate to things we could have done more of to become even better at this.
The criminal economy in Sweden is estimated to amount to around 350 billion kronor per year, which is approximately 1 billion kronor per day. To put this into perspective, it is almost one-third of the state's budget, which is a threat to the system. As the Minister for Justice said, it is the money that drives organized crime. The profits finance the violence, the recruitment, and the continued expansion.
Against this background, the role of the Economic Crime Authority is crucial. The Minister for Justice reports large total figures for the justice system in his response, and it is good that resources have been strengthened. My interpellation, however, concerns something more specific, namely whether we have sufficient capacity to meet the growing economic crime.
It is true that the Swedish Economic Crime Authority's appropriations have increased. But costs have also increased, which means that in practice, there are fewer funds than in the previous year. The authority assesses that the money is not sufficient to build up the long-term analysis and intelligence work that is needed.
At the same time, the annual reports show that the authority is delivering results. The number of prosecuted persons has increased by around 20 percent, the number of cases where the state demands the return of criminal profits has increased significantly, and the number of cases of independent forfeiture has increased by around 66 percent. It is now about 340 million kronor that the state takes back from criminals, which is very good. Processing times are short, so the backlog has decreased. This is, therefore, an authority that, despite restructuring and high pressure, has stepped up the work against the criminal economy.
But the fight cannot only be about investigating when the damage has already been done. Yesterday, I read in the newspaper that at least 39 municipalities have broken their contracts with private home care companies due to suspected fraud and deficiencies. Furthermore, 15 municipalities have filed police reports, but only one has led to a conviction. This shows once again how attractive a market welfare is for criminal schemes and that municipalities often stand alone when they try to detect and stop advanced economic crimes.
Therefore, a better preventive analysis, a clear national situation report, and stronger coordination are needed so that we can act before the money has disappeared.
Madam Speaker! How does the Minister and the Government intend to strengthen the preventive and analysis-based work, especially in relation to municipalities and authorities, in order to counter welfare crime and economic crime before the damage is done?
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! I thank Lars Isacsson for the opportunity to discuss these important issues, both how we shall combat the criminal economy in general and more concretely about the Economic Crime Authority's very important role in this work.
When it comes to combating the criminal economy, it must be understood that several different actors must be offensive. The police obviously have a central role, not least against organized fraud crime. The Prosecution Authority also has an important role. This also applies to the Economic Crime Authority, especially when it involves more advanced economic crime.
Many well-founded views have previously emerged on how the operations at the Swedish Economic Crime Authority can be strengthened and developed. We have an audit from the National Audit Office, and the Riksdag has tasked the government with reviewing this. Furthermore, an investigation has looked into the issues, and we made the choice not to do as the investigator advocated and phase out the authority, but instead maintain the authority and its mandate, as well as develop and strengthen the operations. Even the agency mandate I mentioned initially regarding cooperation between the Swedish Police Authority, the Swedish Prosecution Authority, and the Swedish Economic Crime Authority must be developed and strengthened in various ways, and this work is ongoing.
As the question has been posed, it may be easy to get the impression that the government, contrary to this intention, would have directed extensive savings requirements towards the authority. I want to say that is not the case. On the contrary, it is the case that the appropriations to the authority have increased by 260 million during these years – from 953 million to 1.2 billion kronor. It is also important to note that the number of employees at the Economic Crime Authority increased by 133 people between the years 2022 and 2024, from 670 to 803 people. This is an expression of investments in the operations, not for a political demand for the opposite.
I completely agree on the importance of preventive work. Therefore, it was important for us to meet the Swedish Economic Crime Authority's request for funds for crime prevention work. The authority also received exactly what was requested for this year. For 2026, however, there was no request for funds for a general development of the investigation or intelligence activities.
As I said, a broader assignment is currently underway which includes both the Economic Crime Authority, the Police Authority, and the Prosecution Authority. This assignment is to be reported in March. We will also receive new underlying documents from the authority ahead of the upcoming budget process now in March. I am convinced that we will thereby obtain an excellent basis to continue developing the operations and provide the resources required to be able to work with combating crime and strengthening the preventive work.
Lars Isacsson (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Justice, for the answer!
As I said in my first post, I am aware that it is not about any cuts; one does not receive fewer funds. However, when I look out here in the chamber, I see some former municipal council members, which I also am, and as they know, it is essentially a cut if no compensation is made for costs. That is what I mean. Therefore, we Social Democrats want an indexing of, for example, the state grants to the municipalities.
I think it was a wise choice not to dismantle the Swedish Economic Crime Authority but instead to strengthen and develop it. I will try to be constructive and provide some suggestions on how one could do that.
In my first post, I stated that the Economic Crime Authority is delivering results and that the work of recovering criminal profits is increasing significantly. The state is now requesting to recover around 340 million kronor from criminals. That is good, but it must be put into perspective. There is great potential for development here. If the criminal economy turns over around 350 billion kronor per year, the money that we manage to recover today is still a very small part of the total. The profits are around 180 billion kronor, so the potential is considerably larger.
Historically, the way to work against the mafia and serious organized crime, both in Sweden and internationally, has been "follow the money". But in the ESO report that has been released, which is very good, a concept is launched that is new to me at least, namely "go before the money". Today, it is not enough to just follow the money, but it is a matter of taking the next step. It is not enough to track the profits when the crime has already been committed, but it is a matter of identifying the structures before the profits arise.
I believe it would be good if the Economic Crime Authority were developed in two clear directions.
The first is a national center for forfeiture. There, one would gather the country's leading expertise when it comes to tracing, freezing, and reclaiming criminal proceeds and being able to attack corporate structures. If one can, for example, forfeit shares in criminal companies, the state can not only take money but also break the control over the operations themselves.
The second is a national financial intelligence center to collect and analyze information on suspected economic flows at an early stage. It could involve procurement or welfare systems. It could concern industries with large international capital flows and weak regulation, such as the agency industry within football.
There is a difference between chasing the money and staying one step ahead of it. Organized crime is fast and professional, and in that case, the state must be at least as professional.
Madam Speaker! I understand that the Minister does not want to anticipate the investigation that will be presented in March, but perhaps we can have a discussion on ways to develop the Economic Crime Authority into a national center for forfeiture and a national financial intelligence center.
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! I completely agree with the preventive approach. Especially when it comes to economic crime, the experience is that it is very difficult to combat the crime, hold people accountable, and recover the funds that have disappeared through the criminal activity once the money is gone or once the transaction has taken place.
A preventive approach is absolutely crucial; I believe this has been shown, for example, regarding the work against telephone scams affecting the elderly. It can now be seen that the profits from these telephone scams have been halved over a period of a few years. This is not a consequence of following the money once the transaction has taken place and the money is gone, but rather it is about the banks and the Swedish Police Authority sitting down and ensuring together that it became much harder for the criminals to defraud the elderly of money. It is therefore the preventive measures that have prevented or hindered this crime to such an extent that we can see the profits falling significantly. This experience can undoubtedly be carried over in relation to other economic crime.
I would like to comment more closely on both of Lars Isacsson's questions.
A financial intelligence center is already in the making, so to speak. I have even been there and cut the ribbon. It is the Swedish Police Authority that is hosting this center, but all relevant agencies are involved. It is not just about the law enforcement agencies. The Swedish Tax Agency is, for example, a central actor in this work. Also private actors – for example banks, and one can also imagine other financial actors – are involved here, and they even sit in the same corridor. These actors are now cooperating very closely to stay one step ahead and be able to prevent and stop a great deal of economic crime.
A national center for forfeiture is something that we have indicated we want to establish. I received the investigation proposals in that part as recently as last week or possibly the week before. An investigation that looked at forfeiture has concretized how such a center could be built up. On the other hand, the investigation has not given any recommendation on which agency should host such a center. We are now preparing this.
Something I am prepared to say here and now is that it is very significant to establish such a center. We see the power of forfeiture as a tool. This applies in particular to independent forfeiture, which takes place entirely outside the courtroom and the criminal proceedings.
I also believe it is important to establish that this is not just another tool in the toolbox. It is about a different perspective, a different way of working, and a different methodology than traditional crime fighting. If it is to gain strength, it cannot be added as a garnish to the salmon; instead, it must truly be structured so that our system, as a whole, utilizes the new ways of working against economic crime that forfeiture represents. Such a center as mentioned here would strengthen this work.
In conclusion, I would like to say something regarding the assignment that the Economic Crime Authority, the Swedish Prosecution Authority, and the Swedish Police Authority have received to strengthen the cooperation between the authorities against the criminal economy. The basis will, as mentioned, be available within a few weeks. I expect it to be an excellent basis for continuing to develop the work regarding both forfeiture and other measures against the criminal economy.
Lars Isacsson (S)
Madam Speaker! I thank Minister of Justice Gunnar Strömmer for the answer.
I believe we have a fairly large consensus on this. I also believe that we both are provoked when we read reports about how much the criminal economy turns over and how large the profits are. Regardless of which political party we represent, I believe we have quite good ideas about what those funds could instead be used for to strengthen society.
I also believe in this idea of a new way of working against the criminal economy. I believe that the Economic Crime Authority could be a hub and a spearhead in that work.
It is provoking that the criminal economy turns over 350 billion kronor per year. That is 1 billion per day, which is eight to nine times more than what we spend on the Swedish Police Authority.
How are we to defend the welfare state and the rule of law against systematic looting? An important part of that, I believe, would be to strengthen the Economic Crime Authority and to have a stronger preventive effort with support for municipalities and authorities, as much more is needed when it comes to the municipalities' procurement. A national financial intelligence center was also needed so that one can get ahead of the money, not just follow it, and also a national center for forfeiture, so that one can systematically track and reclaim criminal profits and break up criminal corporate structures.
Organized crime follows the money. We must protect what belongs to the citizens and take back what has been stolen. I believe we can find a consensus here.
Justitieministern Gunnar Strömmer (M)
Madam Speaker! I thank Lars Isacsson once again for another of the meaningful exchanges between us regarding very pressing issues.
I fully share the intention of the interpellation, namely that we must, with all available means, strengthen our ability to combat and choke the criminal economy. There is no doubt that we must do several things simultaneously when it comes to organized crime. We must address and stop the brutal violence, the shootings and the explosions, and break the recruitment of children into the gangs.
Strangling the criminal economy is a cornerstone of the work because it to such a great extent drives the other, namely violence, which is often a byproduct of conflicts over market shares and money. This is something I think we should really take away from today's exchange. In that respect, there is a consensus, and it is a great strength for us as a society that it does.
The Economic Crime Authority has a central role in the work, of course in interaction with other law enforcement agencies. I can at least say as much as that I believe we have much more to gain, both from that authority itself and from that authority in interaction with other actors.
Some of the reviews and investigations that have been carried out and the aftermath that has occurred in the form of the exchange through the assignment to the authorities that I mentioned perhaps also identify some frictions in this work. It is important that we can resolve them and achieve full system power moving forward.
We have talked about several things today, such as the financial intelligence center, a corresponding center regarding forfeiture, as well as the mobilization of more resources for prevention. We shall take all of this with us into the continued work.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.