Response to interpellation 2025/26:95 on the legislative change regarding tax exemption for competence support
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns a legislative change regarding tax exemption for skills support. M considers it important that more people get the opportunity to further their education in order to reduce skills shortages 1 2. M admits that a motion is being prepared in the Government Offices 2 and considers the transition study support to be wise, as well as that the government has simplified rules and increased the funds to CSN 3. M emphasizes that it is a budget issue 3. S considers that the government is not acting fast enough despite the parties being in agreement that the tax liability must be addressed 4 5. S argues that the government must act promptly to provide the country with skills 6 and expresses concern over the uncertainty surrounding the motion 7 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.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Mr. Speaker! Patrik Björck has asked me if I intend to abolish the taxation of the competence support, and if so, when.
Through the labor market reform 2022, Swedish labor law was reformed while a new basic transition and skills support was introduced. These are important reforms. That more people get the opportunity to further their education and that more people get the right skills is important for the Swedish labor market to function and to reduce the skills shortage that exists today and which is a major obstacle for many companies and many individuals.
As I noted in my response to the parliamentary question from Niklas Karlsson on the same subject at the end of October, Svenskt Näringsliv, LO, and PTK have submitted a petition requesting tax exemption specifically for competence support. The petition is still being prepared in the Government Offices.
Patrik Björck (S)
Mr. Speaker! I thank the Minister for Finance for the answer.
This is a question that we should reasonably be able to agree on. When one listens to the answer, Mr. Speaker, it seems that the Minister for Finance thinks that these are important issues and that the reform that was implemented a few years ago was an important reform. The Minister for Finance seems to think that it is good that more people get the opportunity to pursue further education.
But it is a bit strange that the government, if we are in agreement that this is important and good, does not act as if one actually thinks that this is important. To say that something is important or good does not necessarily mean that one acts as one says. It is precisely the action, Mr. Speaker – to do something – that I am requesting in the interpellation.
It is exactly as the Minister for Finance says: the labor market partners, those who uphold the Swedish model, have come forward with a petition for tax exemption for skills support. They have done so because they have noted problems that have arisen when trying to implement this important reform.
The legislative changes entered into force on 1 October 2022 and were followed up by agreements between the parties in the labor market, who took their responsibility and signed main agreements, which was a necessary part of this. The parties in the labor market thus took their share of the responsibility for the reform, and then the state – or actually we here in the Riksdag, if one wants to be really pedantic – took its share. This happened through legislative changes, which had indeed been preceded by government bills. In October, we could then launch the reform.
The problem is that the transition organizations, almost immediately when they were to implement this, noticed issues that arose during the practical handling. The issues concerned whether the competence support was subject to income tax or not. The transition organizations then conducted an investigation. When it was established that what they suspected unfortunately was correct – that the law would be interpreted so that this was taxable – they requested documentation from the Swedish Tax Agency, which made the same assessment. After that, they paused the offer of education within the framework of the competence support, which means that an important part of the entire reform stands still.
This is what the labor market parties completely agree on, and that is why they are submitting a joint petition to the government to rectify the problem. They state that this is a problem that must be addressed through legislation. In that case, the government normally returns to the Riksdag with a proposal for legislative amendments; that is how the Swedish constitution works.
If the government does not do this and does not seem willing to do anything, there is a small possibility for the Riksdag to take the initiative. That is what we Social Democrats tried to do in the Committee on Taxation earlier this autumn. Unfortunately, we did not get the Tidö parties on board with this committee initiative; otherwise, we would have had an opportunity to push through a change in the legislation. But because the Tidö parties in the Committee on Taxation did not want to participate in this, we are naturally completely dependent on the government returning with a government bill in the matter.
The question I asked in the interpellation regarding when this will occur remains. I will see if I can get an answer to that in the continued debate.
Adrian Magnusson (S)
Mr. Speaker! This morning, figures from Statistics Sweden were released showing that we have 9 percent unemployment in Sweden. That is a very high unemployment. We have a situation in Sweden where, at the same time as we have high unemployment, we have a great need for skills in various areas. We thus have a situation with high unemployment and simultaneously a skills shortage in many places. It is a bit strange, but labor market issues have been treated rather neglectfully by this government across a broad spectrum.
The question that Patrik Björck raises is part of a much larger agreement, just as he touched upon. The transition study support and the basic transition and skills support were a core part of the agreement the parties made and which the legislator subsequently met with legislation.
This too has, at least in some parts, been treated neglectfully by the government. For a period, there were very long processing times at the Central Swedish National Student Aid Board, CSN. People had to wait a long time to be informed whether they would receive transition study support or not. The authority pointed out several times that it needed expanded resources to handle the large volumes of cases it received.
I have myself had debates in this chamber with the then Minister for Education Mats Persson on this issue. It was then obvious that there was a need but that the government did not meet it.
As Patrik Björck says, it sounds in the answer to the interpellation as if the Minister for Finance is actually quite in agreement with the Social Democrats that this is not great – to put it that way. Furthermore, the parties, who carry the agreement and who have carried it creditably, are in agreement on the issue. If one claims that politics is driven by interests, which I want to claim, then the different interests in the labor market are thus in agreement. The different interests that our parties represent in some sense are also in agreement.
That is why, just as Member Björck pointed out, it is somewhat strange that the government does not meet the initiatives that are taken and does not act faster when one receives these types of signals from the parties and when initiatives are also taken in the Riksdag's Committee on Taxation.
We Social Democratic members of the Committee on Employment have had a dialogue with LO. It is natural that we have it, and I assume that the Finance Minister has a closer dialogue with Svenskt Näringsliv. In our close dialogue, LO has highlighted this as an issue that needs to be resolved and expresses a frustration over just this: This is an issue where Svenskt Näringsliv, LO, and PTK are in agreement. Why can the issue not be handled in a quick and adequate manner?
It is this that I want to ask the Minister of Finance about. If it is indeed the case that Svenskt Näringsliv, LO, PTK and, as it sounds, the governing parties actually think that the issue should be handled and quite promptly – why is the government then not more agile? As MP Björck said, things are happening simultaneously, and the applications and the project are currently on a bit of a pause. The government needs to act.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Mr. Speaker! I would like to thank Patrik Björck for an important interpellation.
I believe there is a great consensus in the chamber of the Riksdag, and I know that it definitely exists between me and Patrik Björck, regarding this: A key to why Sweden has succeeded so well over many decades in building the country properly is that there has been close cooperation between, for example, the parties, the trade union organizations and the employer organizations, but also between the state and these organizations. We have worked closely for a long time to create value that we can also export. Sweden is a fairly small country in relation to many others, and we are therefore export-dependent. There we have a common task, and it is a task that we take and will continue to take very seriously.
Mr. Speaker! I often say that Sweden is the land of opportunity. Some claim that the USA would be that. So it may not be just now, but it has been so for many years. I want to mean that Sweden is the land of opportunity. It is the land of opportunity for a person like me, who grew up in a family where it was not a given that one was encouraged to continue studying and where the parents did not have a large wallet. Swedish school and Swedish education, free education, has made me richer and given me opportunities.
Sweden is also the land of opportunity for those who immigrate here. If you come as an asylum seeker with a family, you can learn Swedish for free; in many cases, you even receive compensation for studying Swedish. You can study and attend a free education with various types of student support. Sweden is the land of opportunity.
Add to that this agreement, which in my opinion is fantastic, made just a few years ago, where even we from the opposition were involved and met the parties regularly. In the middle of life, one can now with compensation retrain, switch, and supplement with competence – this because it is so central to the labor market and the economy that is changing rapidly.
Here we are quick to adapt. I don't remember exactly, but that agreement was about between 6 and 7 billion. It is a cost that makes many Swedes currently take courses and study further to then return to their work or move on to another. It is also the key, or one of the keys, for Swedish companies to be able to grow and for Sweden to be competitive.
This question could be said to be part of this, Mr. Speaker. It is good to point out. The basic rule is that transition support is not taxed, precisely because it is intended for retraining, for example if one has lost their job. What can be taxed today is the competence support, which I believe the interpellor is looking for. One receives it during an ongoing employment, for example if one has purchased a training course. The Swedish Tax Agency then interprets this as a benefit for the person's employment.
Just as the interpellator and Adrian Magnusson say, we have received this petition from the parties. It is currently being prepared. I will have to get back to you on exactly when we are finished with it and what the outcome will be. But I still just want to emphasize and assert that Sweden is a country where there are great opportunities to transition, develop, and replenish, and where we together make the Swedish labor market and Swedish companies even stronger. But this petition is being processed, and I will get back to you when it has been processed.
Fundamentally, I think it is very good that we and the Social Democrats are now pushing forward on this issue. Transition is needed for the Swedish labor market and Swedish growth.
Patrik Björck (S)
Mr. Speaker! I had intended to begin this speech by saying that I will interpret the Minister for Finance positively. After listening to the Minister for Finance, I must reassess that opening and say that I interpret the Minister for Finance as worried. I am becoming concerned.
Now the question is no longer just about if and when a decision will be made. Now we are also to be uncertain about what the outcome will be. I do not know what the outcome will be, says the Minister for Finance.
What is concerning is that there is an underlying anxiety among the parties in the Swedish labor market. I can say in parentheses that my colleague Adrian Magnusson has met with LO on the issue, which is very good, and that I have had intensive discussions also with Svenskt Näringsliv. We have thus received input from all sides on this issue, and everyone is concerned.
What creates an uncertainty regarding whether the government truly embraces this reform as much as it sounds from the rostrum is that one quite immediately sees a problem with the reform, namely the competence support and that this is taxed as income. At the same time, the newspaper Näringslivet, which I suspect stands close to Svenskt Näringsliv: Now the transition support is threatened due to cuts by CSN. This is a newspaper article that was written this week and which is based on having taken part of the government's budget and seen how the government handles CSN and that problems also arise there.
The government's handling of CSN thus threatens the transition support, and the government's inability to change the legislation threatens the competence support. This means that the very positive attitude from the government's side in words is constantly countered in action. It creates a concern.
If one is still to try to interpret this positively, if one is still to try to hope that we will be able to jointly remedy the problems, we do seem to be in agreement that it shall happen. Can we then get a clear answer from the Minister for Finance in the rostrum here today that we do not need to be worried about what the outcome will be? Can we get an assurance that when the government has prepared this motion and takes action, will this action lead to the problem being solved? That would be very good.
Then, despite everything, the question of when this will happen is not unimportant. It is naturally incredibly important that we receive a notification that the issue will be resolved and that the notification comes soon and is clear. If there are problems regarding CSN, the Finance Minister can naturally act there as well. There is a possibility to ensure that the agency receives funds so that it can fulfill its obligations regarding this reform. But when we receive the notification is very important.
I would also, given those who are listening to this debate, like to ask the Minister for Finance not only when the problem will be addressed but also when this petition reached the Minister for Finance. How much time has the Minister for Finance had? It would be good for those listening to get a picture of how the government has worked with this. When did the Ministry of Finance, the Minister for Finance, and the government find out that this problem existed through the petition from the labor market parties?
Adrian Magnusson (S)
Mr. Speaker! I would like to agree with what Member Björck says. I also become a bit worried when it begins to be argued what the outcome will be. I initially perceived it as rather a question of if and when, but I become a bit concerned when a reasoning also begins to be presented about what the outcome will be.
Mr. Speaker! We have a changing labor market. We see tendencies, even if they may not be very clear yet, that it will undergo major structural transformations. Artificial intelligence can change the labor market in large parts, perhaps also in sectors where it has not historically been so common. Add to this that we have high unemployment in the country. We also have other industries that for a long time have pointed out that there is a skills shortage.
Member of Parliament Amloh, who is in the chamber right now, and I, for example, was just yesterday at a seminar with the transport industry where the skills shortage within that industry was highlighted. There are many other industries – I cannot stand here and list them all – where the skills shortage is truly pointed out.
When the government does not act on such a clear issue where, as stated, the parties are in agreement – Svenskt Näringsliv, PTK and LO all point out that this needs to be handled and preferably promptly – it is concerning. In the situation Sweden finds itself in, the Finance Minister would like to talk about growth, and if one wants growth in this country, one must do everything possible to provide the country with competence. The government must do everything it can to ensure that the competence needed on the Swedish labor market also arrives, and then these types of issues need to be resolved. They need to be resolved promptly.
If the government is now really so positive about handling this issue as the Minister for Finance initially wants to give the impression of – even if one then, as Member Björck and I pointed out, becomes a bit concerned about whether that is actually the case – the government needs to act, and quickly.
I hope that the Minister for Finance in the speech she is now preparing for will be able to calm my and Member Björck's concern.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Mr. Speaker! I thank you once again for this discussion. It pleases me that we have two Social Democrats who are concerned that I am not lowering the tax in this area fast enough. I know that both members know – I know Patrik Björck well; we entered this chamber at the same time just over 19 years ago – that this is a budget issue. Whether it will be included in the next budget or not, we will, of course, return to. But it pleases me that you are pushing forward and think that this is an important issue, because I do too.
I think the entire transition study support, the entire transition package that the parties together with the state have decided on, is incredibly wise. It will make things easier for very many. Many are currently in an education and in a, what shall I say, growth school in order to be able to add even more of the competencies that are needed for the future labor market – and to grow themselves, of course. It is always so: It is when people grow that Sweden can grow.
We have done quite a lot when it comes to the transition study support. We have, for example, ensured that CSN has received more money for this. We have also made regulatory simplifications so that it has become easier to receive the support.
But I want to conclude, Mr. Speaker, with this being concerned. There were two gentlemen here who were concerned. Then I just want to throw back a reflection to both Patrik Björck and Adrian Magnusson about concerns. What concerns me right now and what I intend to speak with the parties about are the establishment jobs.
The establishment jobs were a fantastic idea that was born a long time ago. At that time, others were responsible for Svenskt Näringsliv and LO. The establishment jobs were intended to help newcomers or others who have stood outside for a while to enter the labor market. It was a long process, which finally we, this government, saw to getting in place. There were also resources and money for this.
If there is anything that concerns me, it is that many are outside the labor market and are not getting in. Here is a perfectly brilliant tool that the parties have asked for, nagged for, and exerted influence to obtain. This government did what we were supposed to do, namely to introduce this.
But it is a handful, perhaps 100–200 max, who have an establishment job today in Sweden. It is a disgrace, and there the parties need to do more. That being said: I take responsibility for ensuring that Sweden's workers, hard-working people, will continue to transition and supplement their skills. I also take responsibility for the establishment jobs, which will make it easier for those who have difficulty entering the labor market to get in. But that means those who have set the requirements also take their responsibility.
Patrik Björck (S)
Mr. Speaker! It is exciting that we can agree that it is good to lower the tax. The problem is that we were not in agreement. It is only we who want it, and we have not seen that the Finance Minister wants to lower the tax. Regardless of whether the tax is to be lowered or not, the tax will never be collected because the support has been paused. It will be plus minus zero budget-wise. But never mind that!
Now there is an opportunity for the Minister for Finance to act. Since the Minister for Finance did not want to answer the question of when the motion was submitted and I am not quite sure whether the Minister for Finance will use their closing statement, nor also whether a notification will be included in that statement, I can tell those listening that the motion from the parties was submitted early this spring – March – to the Ministry of Finance. In the practical work with the competence support, the problem was discovered early on. Probably the government was alerted to this before the motion was submitted. But officially, the motion arrived in March. It is then a bit strange – if one is so convinced that this is a good reform – that one has not acted.
We did not get a clear answer on what the outcome would be, but I continue to interpret the Finance Minister's actions positively nonetheless. I assume that when the Finance Minister acts, it will mean that the parties are being met and that it is ensured that the competence support is not taxed as income. They have had plenty of time.
The government has the opportunity to act at all times. When the autumn budget has been adopted, a spring budget will be presented. There is an opportunity for the government to act if one thinks it is important to strengthen the Swedish labor market and the Swedish model.
Finansministern Elisabeth Svantesson (M)
Mr. Speaker! I will not speak much more. Patrik Björck knows very well that I will not say when and exactly what will happen with the motion. I also note that the member does not mention so-called outsiders, who do not enter the labor market at all even though the parties have promised so. But that must be another debate further ahead.
I thank you for this debate and wish the member a pleasant weekend.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.