Response to interpellations 2025/26:135 and 172 on measures against economic inequality
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 government has fought inflation and that households' real disposable incomes have recovered 1. M claims that the budget proposal for 2026 lowers food prices and increases incomes for families with children and pensioners 1. M believes that the policy has benefited those with the lowest incomes, that income inequalities have fallen and that economic vulnerability has decreased since 2021 1. S argues that the gaps are growing due to the government's political decisions 2. S claims that tax cuts have benefited high-income earners while the child allowance has not been increased despite increased living costs 2. S believes that the government prioritizes tax cuts over welfare and that Sweden needs a new government 2.
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)
Madam Speaker! Eva Lindh has asked me if I intend to take any measures in light of the increasing economic inequality. She has also asked if I intend to take any measures to develop knowledge on how the economic differences have changed and how they have affected the economic development in Sweden.
Samuel Gonzalez Westling has asked me how I view the Riksbank's assessment that household consumption and real incomes have remained stagnant since 2022. He has also asked what responsibility I and the government have for the fact that households – especially families with children and pensioners – have been affected to such a great extent by the government's inflation fight. Finally, he has asked how I explain that the economic development of households in Sweden differs compared to the USA and several EU countries, and what measures I have taken and intend to take in the future to strengthen the economic development in Sweden.
The government inherited an inflation of 10 percent that dragged down the Swedish economy into a prolonged recession. Due to the inflation, households' real disposable incomes decreased, which hit many hard. Therefore, the government stepped in to combat inflation from day one, while we ensured that we supported households and welfare in a difficult time. It has yielded results. Inflation has fallen and is now stable. During the third quarter of 2025, households' real disposable incomes were back at the peak level from the first quarter of 2022. Many households still have it tough and struggle with high costs, but consumption has increased, the economic recovery has begun, and growth is expected to pick up further this year.
When the government took office in 2022, Sweden was ranked 22nd in the EU's growth rankings. Next year we are expected to be in 6th place, according to the EU Commission's forecast from November 2025. The growth is expected to be driven by domestic demand, largely thanks to an expansive fiscal policy.
In the budget bill for 2026 (prop. 2025/26:1), a number of measures are proposed and announced to lower food prices and increase households' disposable incomes. A typical family with children with a police officer and a nurse will have 1,800 kronor more in their wallet every month as a result of the reforms in the budget.
If one looks at the entire parliamentary term, the government has done even more to strengthen people's finances. As a result of the government's budgets, an average family with children will have 5,000 kronor more in their wallet every month in 2026 compared to 2022. An average retired couple will have 2,200 kronor more in their wallet every month. A typical diesel tank is about 500 kronor cheaper than in 2022 as a result of the government's policy.
In order to help economically vulnerable households in the long term, it is important to get more people into work. The Government is therefore implementing a number of measures that collectively aim to strengthen the work principle and make it more profitable to move from benefits to work.
The government's policy, viewed over the entire mandate period, has benefited most those who earn the least. The effects on households' economic standard as a result of the government's proposals and notifications during the mandate period show that the economic standard increases most in percentage terms in the tenth of the population that has the lowest economic standard and least in the highest income groups. This can be seen in the distribution policy report that is made every year in our government bill. The total income inequalities, measured with the so-called Gini coefficient, have also fallen successively after reaching a historically high level in 2021 under the Social Democratic-led government.
The proportion in Sweden living with material deprivation is low in comparison to other European countries. According to other established measures, for example SCB's measure for low standard of living and the proportion who have an economic standard below 60 percent of the median, economic vulnerability has decreased since 2021.
Eva Lindh (S)
Madam Speaker! Sweden is one of the world's richest countries, and yet the gaps are widening. It is not a law of nature. It is a result of political decisions. During this parliamentary term, the policy of the SD-led government has consistently moved in a direction that increases the gaps in Sweden. The Financial Supervisory Authority shows that the richest 5 percent now own approximately half of all financial assets in Sweden. At the same time, we know that over 13 percent of the population live with a low economic standard. Children grow up with overcrowding, anxiety, and limited life chances – not because of a lack of ambition, but because of a lack of fair conditions. It is not a society that holds together. It is a society where opportunities and security are concentrated among a few.
Tax cuts have been the government's primary priority, but it is not ordinary wage earners who have received the most. The Fiscal Policy Council and the Konjunkturinstitutet have shown that the biggest winners are households with high incomes, while low-income earners receive small or no improvements at all. At the same time, the government has chosen not to increase the child allowance despite significantly increased living costs. It is a clear political choice, as the child allowance is one of the most accurate tools we have to reduce child poverty.
The cash register has deteriorated, and welfare in municipalities and regions is underfunded. The consequence is that people with small margins are pressed harder while those with large resources receive tax cuts. It is no coincidence. It is a pattern. It is a political choice.
When the government chooses to prioritize tax cuts over investments in welfare, when it says no to increasing the child allowance but yes to lower taxes for high-income earners, and when it accepts that compensations lag behind while prices rise – then the policy actively drives inequalities. The consequences are clear. Children grow up in economic insecurity. Municipalities and regions are forced to cut in school, social support, and healthcare. People who become ill or unemployed fall harder.
Sweden could have chosen another path. We could have prioritized families with children. We could have strengthened security for everyone. We could have invested in welfare. But the government has made other choices.
Politics must take responsibility. Above all, Sweden must get a new government. Sweden needs a new direction and a policy that builds the country together instead of dividing it. It is a policy where work pays off, where more people get into work, where the welfare holds society together, and where even the strongest bear their fair share of the responsibility. With our policy and with our budget, nine out of ten would have fared better financially. Not the one-tenth who are doing the very best, but the other nine out of ten in Sweden. That is what Social Democracy stands for, and that is what Sweden needs. The entire society wins from it, because all research shows that a more equal country also performs better economically.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.