Temporarily reduced employer contributions for 19-23-year-olds

Jessica Rodén (S)

Madam Speaker! Today we are considering the proposal on temporarily reduced employer contributions for young people between 19 and 23 years of age.

We Social Democrats will not reserve ourselves in this matter because we safeguard the coherent budget process. The proposal was included in the budget, and we have presented a different economic policy. We do, however, have a special statement.

Let me start with the obvious: Young people should have jobs. They should get a foot in the door of the labor market, and they should feel that society believes in them. But politics is not just about intentions, politics is about priorities and about what kind of society we are building.

Madam Speaker! Sweden is in a recession. Unemployment is high, and youth unemployment is higher. Growth is weak, and municipalities and regions are under heavy pressure. At the same time, the number of people living in poverty has increased sharply. According to SCB, the figure has increased from around 150,000 to over 400,000 people, and these are people who cannot afford a basic standard of living.

Madam Speaker! The government is now receiving the sharpest criticism it has received to date from the Fiscal Policy Council. The Council describes this year's report as the most serious so far. They point out the contradiction in that the government says it is necessary to borrow for increased defense expenditures while simultaneously implementing large tax cuts. This means that future generations are to both finance a stronger defense and pay the interest costs for today's loan-financed reforms.

This situation is not a coincidence, but rather the result of a policy that has prioritized broad tax cuts over investments and benefited those with the highest incomes while families with children have had it tougher. The government has lowered taxes for high-income earners and chosen not to increase the child allowance. It is not a policy that closes gaps.

The temporary reduction of the employer contribution costs 6 billion kronor. Research shows that general reductions largely subsidize employments that would have occurred anyway. IFAU's evaluation of the previous reduction showed that the reform increased employment but that the cost per created job was in the magnitude of 1 million kronor per job. It is expensive.

The problem in the Swedish economy today is not primarily that it is expensive to hire young people; the problem is that demand is weak. Companies are holding back. Investments are missing, and municipalities and regions are struggling. When the wheels turn slowly, it does not help to just make it cheaper to hire, but instead, one must get the entire economy moving.

Madam Speaker! Social Democratic economic policy is based on three simple things: to invest when times are difficult, to strengthen households' purchasing power, and to ensure that jobs emerge through education and future investments. We do not believe in borrowing for broad tax cuts, but we believe in borrowing for investments – investments in infrastructure, in the climate transition, in the development of industry, and in welfare. That is how you create real jobs.

The government's line is instead to lower taxes and hope for an effect. We know that it is not enough. Almost every fourth young person lacks a job, and in that case, a discount is not enough. Education is required, matching is required, and a strong labor market policy is required. We Social Democrats propose more labor market training, expanded vocational adult education and komvux, job contracts for young people, and targeted measures for those who are furthest from the labor market. There is a difference between making young people cheaper and making them stronger.

Madam Speaker! Employer contributions are not just a cost item. They finance our collective safety systems – pensions, health insurance, and parental insurance. When they are lowered, one must also be prepared to explain how the welfare system is actually to be financed.

We choose a policy that puts work before tax cuts, that puts families with children before high-income earners and that invests in people, not in temporary discounts. We build Sweden stronger, not by making young people cheaper but by making them stronger.

As I said at the beginning of my speech, we will not hold back in this matter because we safeguard the coherent budget process.

(Applause)

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

Daniel Persson (SD)

Madam Speaker! We are now debating the Social Insurance Committee's report SfU11, and I would like to begin by moving for the approval of the committee's proposal.

The Sweden Democrats and the government propose reduced employer contributions for young people. We are now strengthening the position of young people in the labor market and making it easier for them to enter the working life. This makes it easier for Swedish companies to both retain and hire young people. In the report, a temporary reduction of employer contributions and the general wage contribution is proposed for those who, at the beginning of the year, have turned 18 but are not 23 years old.

Madam Speaker! When the Tidö parties took office after the 2022 election, Sweden was in a period of very high inflation. Sweden's economy has since been in a prolonged recession, and the economic situation makes it harder for young people to get a foothold in the labor market. It can only be stated that employment has decreased more among young people than in other age groups in the ongoing recession. It is important to strengthen young people's position in the labor market and at the same time create better conditions for companies to both retain and hire young people.

Madam Speaker! Small and medium-sized enterprises are the engine of the Swedish economy, and for many of them, personnel costs are one of the largest expenses. It is important that we, step by step, make it easier and more profitable to run businesses in Sweden. Swedish prosperity is built on more people entering the workforce. We need to strengthen the incentives to take a job, and it is important that those who can work also do so.

At the same time, it must become more profitable and less risky for companies to hire. We also need to make it easier to run businesses. Since earlier, the growth support has been in place. Today, companies can receive growth support for up to 24 consecutive calendar months for their first, and also for their second, employee.

On 1 January this year, extensive simplifications were introduced in the 3:12 regulations for small companies. This meant significant relief for tens of thousands of small business owners who contribute to employment and growth every day.

One of the biggest challenges that our companies highlight is red tape. The Government and the Sweden Democrats are very well aware of this. A simplification council was established during 2024. The council shall obtain and analyze proposals for simplification measures from the business community and other stakeholders. For example, a proposal has been made to abolish the requirement for food when serving alcohol and for VAT deductions for light trucks. In addition to this, the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency and several other agencies have been tasked to review and simplify their regulations to reduce the regulatory burden on companies. Final reporting shall take place during this year.

Sweden is also actively working to avoid over-implementation of EU directives and has submitted over 60 concrete proposals for simplifications to the EU Commission regarding the environment, climate, and the labor market.

Madam Speaker! In the report we are debating today, a temporary reduction of the employer contributions and the general wage contribution is proposed for compensation to persons who, at the beginning of the year, have turned 18 but are not 23 years old. The reduction means that only the age pension contribution as well as half of the other contributions and the general wage contribution shall be paid on compensation up to 25,000 kronor per calendar month. These are welcome reliefs for Swedish companies.

We need to have a good balance when it comes to exemptions from employer contributions. The employer contributions are part of the funding of our social security systems, such as pensions, health insurance, and parental insurance. This is the foundation of our common welfare. Therefore, it is important that we ensure a stable and long-term funding of our security.

Our security systems are based on the fact that we all help each other. It is important that those who can work do so and that everyone contributes to the welfare according to their own ability. That the security systems are there when they are needed, and that we finance them collectively, is the security itself. This is a model that has functioned well over the years. Therefore, entrepreneurship and the work principle are important parts of the financing of our common welfare.

Madam Speaker! During this year, Sweden is expected to achieve the EU's fifth or sixth highest growth. This can be compared to position 22 when the Tidö Government took over. The recovery in the Swedish economy is however fragile, and we live in a least said uneasy time.

All of Sweden's entrepreneurs are the backbone of the country's economy. We need to continue working to make it easier and more profitable to run businesses in Sweden even in turbulent times. Entrepreneurs who want to and dare to hire do not only create jobs but also growth and prosperity. Increased growth means that we secure a secure welfare in Sweden.

This proposal from the government and the Sweden Democrats implies certain welcome reliefs for Swedish companies and gives our youth better conditions to enter the labor market.

(Applause)

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

Anders Ådahl (C)

Madam Speaker! The recipe for Sweden to develop economically naturally contains many parts, but if we go to the basic ingredients, it does not need to become all too complicated. We need labor and jobs, and we have a need for the labor to work. We need to close the skills gap. We need low unemployment and high productivity in both the private and public sectors.

This matter of labor is interesting, Madam Speaker. Sweden is now in a situation that is both worrying and strange. We have declining birth rates. We will become fewer Swedes over time and thus fewer who can work and support more elderly people. It is a difficult demographic challenge that could slow our growth. What should be done about declining birth rates can always be discussed, and that is a debate in itself.

Furthermore, the government and the Sweden Democrats have decided that we shall kick out competent citizens. This is what is called competence exclusions. People who have jobs, who have high and in-demand competence, and who are appreciated colleagues are kicked out now as laws are tightened. When the wage requirement this summer is raised to 90 percent of the median wage, that is to say to 33,390 kronor a month, we send out even more in-demand labor. Smaller municipalities and towns where wages are significantly lower than in Stockholm are hit hardest. In addition to this policy being uncivilized, inhuman, and economically stupid, it is also grossly biased to the detriment of the countryside. Thanks for the coffee, the government!

If we also add the deportations of teenagers, which have a strongly deterrent effect on highly competent labor, we can quite soon calculate that the government and the Sweden Democrats are driving a policy that is slowly but surely driving Sweden into economic ruin. Without competent labor, we get no growth, and the spiral for our development is then turned downwards. Swedes will have it worse.

Madam Speaker! When it comes to getting younger boys and girls into work, much is about lowering thresholds and removing obstacles to hiring young people, from both the individual's and the employer's side. The Government proposes a model with a temporary reduction of the total withdrawal of employer contributions and general wage fees on compensation to persons who, at the beginning of the year, have turned 18 but are not 23 years old. We in the Center Party welcome the intention to lower the costs of hiring young people. The Government's proposal is, however, insufficient and short-sighted and risks becoming ineffective when it comes to meeting the job crisis that Sweden finds itself in. Broader, more comprehensive, and permanent reductions of the employer contributions are needed.

Unemployment in Sweden is high and increasing. Among young people between 15 and 24 years old, unemployment is 23.8 percent, according to Statistics Sweden. This places Sweden at the bottom among the 27 EU countries – I believe only Romania and Spain have higher youth unemployment.

We must reverse this. It is simply incredibly important that we get our young people into the labor market and that they can get a first job, which then leads on to a second and so on. Thresholds must be lowered. The employer contribution should be lowered permanently.

Madam Speaker! Lowered employer contributions for young people can create tens of thousands of new full-time jobs and at the same time provide great opportunities to move from part-time to full-time; this is shown in a report from this autumn from Svenskt Näringsliv which overturns previous conclusions from IFAU that it is expensive and not accurate with lowered employer contributions.

Svenskt Näringsliv is not alone in drawing new conclusions. Even a new study from Handelns Forskningsinstitut shows that the employment effects have been underestimated in previous research. It is noted that the reform not only leads to more employees but also leads to a significant increase in the number of hours worked by already employed staff. What is new is studying the number of hours worked instead of studying hires and layoffs, which is blunter. Systemic effects mean that reduced employer contributions provide large positive employment effects.

What remains unclear, Madam Speaker, however, is whether the government's intention with a temporary reduction yields positive results or not. The significant uncertainty that this entails for employers could very well lead to the results being very modest or even negative, and that would, of course, be both deeply unfortunate and unnecessary. Do as the Center Party proposes instead – permanent reduced employer contributions for young people!

We further consider that employer contributions should be exempted in the case of employing a person who is moving from being unemployed for over a year to starting to work again. For the first ten employments, the employer contributions, with the exception of contributions to state old-age pensions, should be abolished completely for two years. Furthermore, the employer contributions should be lowered on starting salaries amounting to at most 30,000 kronor per month.

With an active labor market policy where we see the conditions for both business and the public sector, we help young people into jobs and Sweden toward growth and welfare.

I vote in favor of reservation 2.

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

Caroline Högström (M)

Madam Speaker! We are now debating temporarily reduced employer contributions for 19–23-year-olds. Sweden is in a prolonged recession with high unemployment, and the economic situation naturally also affects young people's opportunities to establish themselves in the labor market. This can therefore be a piece of the puzzle in the work to facilitate things for them. Continued reforms are needed to help Sweden out of the recession and to counteract unemployment. But I still want to say that it is slowly starting to brighten on the horizon, and we can already see some relief in both the economy and unemployment.

The new rules will come into effect as early as April 1 and will then apply until September 30, 2027. The new rules mean that only the old-age pension fee and half of the other fees shall be paid on compensations up to 25,000 per month. This means that we are reducing the costs of employing young people by approximately one third.

Sweden became poorer and more dangerous for a long time, and the Moderaterna, together with the coalition partners, received the voters' trust to reverse this development. This has been the government's main focus. This is a government that works hard – just look at the list of government bills for 2026.

Madam Speaker! Now a hard-working family with children, where the parents are a police officer and a nurse, can keep 5,000 kronor more per month compared to 2022. But it has been tough years. We took over a galloping inflation of 10 percent, which is now down to a more normal 2 percent. We took over a situation with crime that was eating its way into the body of society and where mothers no longer dared to let their children go to the playground. In January, for the first time since March 2018, we had a continuous month without a single shooting. But unfortunately, this week's shooting in Eskilstuna makes it obvious that the struggle is far from over.

Sweden is still in a recession. Growth is too low, and it requires measures. Reduced employer contributions for young people is a measure to strengthen young people's position in the labor market.

During the spring, I have met entrepreneurs in the tourism industry here in Västmanland. It is an industry that is having a tough time, but it is also where many young people have their first job. I believe that many of us in here had our first job at a restaurant, as a dishwasher, waiter, or cashier. We learned then the importance of diligence and hard work.

Effort must always pay off, and in addition to tax cuts for all those who set their alarm every morning and go to work, we must also facilitate things for the companies, for it is they who hire. Young people's opportunities in the labor market are not a given, and in Sweden we have an all too high youth unemployment.

Madam Speaker! Therefore, we facilitate this through both regulatory simplifications and what we are now debating, namely reduced costs for companies to hire. In this way, we can contribute to supporting companies in industries that are having a tough time and strengthen the position of young people in the labor market so that they get that first job and work extra alongside their studies.

We have already debated the costs of this in connection with the budget bill. But it is an important reminder that the state's revenues are quite large and of how much every individual, especially business owners, contribute to the common good. Even though we are happy to stand here and be proud that we now have the lowest tax burden since 1975, we can simultaneously state that the Swede, especially the Swedish business owner, contributes greatly. This places demands on politics. Every news item about tax waste should hit with greater force in this chamber, given what we take.

Vänsterpartiet and Miljöpartiet state in their joint motion that this will result in a large loss of revenue. That is correct. Reducing companies' costs for employing 19–23-year-olds is significant for the state treasury. But it also has great significance for all companies that employ. Many of the companies that live on the margins, which struggled during the pandemic and barely survived the skyrocketing Sinflation, are also first-line employers. It is therefore both right and fair to facilitate things for the companies and for the young people on the labor market.

I vote in favor of the committee's proposal for a decision.

(Applause)

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

Malte Tängmark Roos (MP)

Madam Speaker! There is a phrase that is often attributed to Albert Einstein but which, as I understand it, in reality comes from the novel Sudden Death by Rita Mae Brown from 1983: The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

This leads me to the government's proposal to temporarily lower the employer contributions for 19–23-year-olds. Unemployment is a major problem in Sweden today; there is no point in beating around the bush. The government has failed grossly to address both mass unemployment in general and youth unemployment specifically. Youth unemployment is a serious problem, and serious problems must be addressed with effective, cost-efficient, and purposeful measures. This is where the shoe pinches, because evaluations of previous reductions in employer contributions for young people show that this type of reform creates few jobs in relation to the cost.

The Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy, IFAU, points out in its research overview that every job created cost hundreds of thousands of kronor in tax revenue loss because many of the subsidized jobs would have emerged even without this support.

For that reason, it is completely unreasonable to now allocate billions to yet another general reduction of employer contributions for young people. These are resources that would have been much better needed for measures that strengthen education, reduce dropouts from upper secondary school, and direct support to young people who actually have difficulty establishing themselves in the labor market.

Konjunkturinstitutet, Arbetsförmedlingen and IFAU are clearly critical in their referral responses.

The National Institute of Economic Research notes that the age group 19–23 is not the group primarily affected by the current recession, but rather it is 24–26-year-olds who have a weaker employment development. The National Institute of Economic Research therefore rejects the proposal. The effects of a temporary tax cut on employment are also questioned, and the risk of large deadweight effects is pointed out.

IFAU emphasizes that youth unemployment is heterogeneous. Many young people find jobs relatively quickly, while a smaller group has large and long-lasting establishment problems. General subsidies to all young people therefore risk primarily benefiting those who would get work anyway rather than those who are furthest from the labor market.

LO, TCO and Saco also reject it, referring to the fact that the reform is a waste of taxpayers' money – in connection with what Caroline Högström said – in relation to the effect achieved, as well as that the tax system as a whole risks being worsened.

For a government that has had as its talking point that it shall get the economy in order, this instead feels very much like an ideologically motivated measure that is to be carried out no matter what.

Another, more fundamental criticism we and the referral bodies have is that this is a proposal included in the budget bill, but that it was referred only after the budget had been submitted to the Riksdag, which limits the possibility for the government and the Riksdag to actually take the referral bodies' views into account. In this case, the memorandum could have been sent out before the summer, which would have made real adjustments of the proposal possible before it was baked into the budget. In addition to the proposal being a waste of money, it is therefore also poorly presented.

Madam Speaker! Sweden needs other, better solutions to reduce unemployment among young people.

Miljöpartiet wants to use these billions for a more active and targeted labor market policy instead of wasting money on measures we know do not work. We prioritize a strengthened and present employment service, especially in socioeconomically disadvantaged areas, with expanded labor market training within shortage occupations, more local job tracks in cooperation with municipalities, regions, and employers, as well as other active interventions for those who are furthest from the labor market.

By combining this with a broadened and reinforced transition support, more training places within, for example, welfare and the green transition, and better working conditions within school, health care, and elderly care, we can secure the supply of skills in the long term and give more people a real chance to establish themselves on the labor market.

Madam Speaker! Overall, both research and the referral bodies' assessments show that the government's proposal is expensive, has poor accuracy and has uncertain effects, while the preparation has been deficient.

Unlike the government, we in Miljöpartiet refuse to do the same thing over and over again and expect a different result. We want to see, instead, more accurate investments in young people's education and establishment, as well as an arrangement where budget proposals are referred in time to be influenced by the expert agencies' views. I therefore move for approval of Miljöpartiet's motions in reservation 1 and 3.

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

Ingemar Kihlström (KD)

Madam Speaker! I want to begin this debate by calling for approval of the committee's majority decision, which entails approval of the government bill and rejection of all motions regarding a temporary reduction in employer contributions for 19–23-year-olds.

Madam Speaker! For us Christian Democrats, entrepreneurship in Sweden is absolutely crucial. Of the country's over 650,000 companies, over 90 percent are small businesses with fewer than ten employees. Many of them are family businesses. These companies uphold our welfare. They create jobs, they develop new ideas, and they generate the tax revenues that finance school, healthcare, and elderly care.

The private business sector – in particular small businesses – has been, is, and will be the foundation for Swedish prosperity. Therefore, policy must be designed with entrepreneurship in focus and with the entrepreneur's perspective at the center.

Good conditions for entrepreneurship are a prerequisite for a good society. It is about creating a climate where people's ideas, creativity, and entrepreneurship are allowed to grow. It is about countering unnecessary bureaucracy and complicated regulations. New laws should always be tested based on how they affect small companies. The tax system should promote new and growing companies and facilitate generational shifts. And more young people and more women should be given real opportunities to start and run companies.

Madam Speaker! All of Sweden's entrepreneurs are the key to breaking the recession. Therefore, the coalition parties presented an entrepreneur package in the budget for 2026 that lowers the costs of hiring young people, lowers the tax for small companies, and reduces the costs of running businesses.

The package includes, in addition to what we are discussing today, temporarily lowered employer contributions for young people between 18 and 23 years old, as well as major simplifications and improvements of the 3:12 regulations and initiatives for regulatory simplifications, lower administrative costs, and shorter permit processes.

The Christian Democrats believe in Sweden's entrepreneurs and that their everyday lives should be simpler. They should be able to devote more time to what they are best at and less time to bureaucracy.

Madam Speaker! We are currently debating temporarily reduced employer contributions for 19–23-year-olds. It is about the employer contributions for persons who, at the beginning of the year, have turned 18 but are not 23 years old being temporarily reduced. The proposal enters into force on 1 April 2026 and shall be applied to compensation issued between 1 April 2026 and 30 September 2027.

What does the proposal mean then? Well, it means a temporary reduction of the employer contributions and the general wage contribution. The purpose of the temporary reduction is to counteract the negative consequences of the prolonged recession for young people's opportunities on the labor market and simultaneously facilitate for companies that employ young people to retain and newly hire staff.

The effect is just as clear. It becomes cheaper to hire. The cost of hiring a young person decreases by a third. It is a concrete and tangible support for many service companies within trade, restaurants, and other industries where many young people get their first job.

Good conditions for entrepreneurship are crucial for economic recovery and long-term growth. With more companies, more jobs and innovations are created.

It is important to support young people's opportunities in the labor market and at the same time facilitate for companies that employ young people to retain and newly hire staff. The temporary reduction of employer contributions is valuable in the work of bridging the recession, and it is carried out together with other measures. Among other things, budget funds have been added to labor market and education initiatives for those who have more difficulty entering the labor market.

Madam Speaker! Today's proposal is a good first step, we in the Christian Democrats believe, but we want to do more. In a recently presented small business report from my own party, one of the proposals is that we want to see a permanent reduction of the employer contribution for persons who have turned 16 but are not yet 23 years old, as we see that it creates even better conditions for growth, more jobs, and a more dynamic small business sector. It is a goal that will guide our policy in the future together with all other proposals for small businesses that are in the report.

Madam Speaker! The Christian Democrats support, as stated, the committee's proposal for a decision, which entails approval of the government bill and rejection of the motions.

The parties in the Tidö agreement as the government base have agreed on a new political direction for Sweden in many areas. We have shown that it is possible to take a new course. When one listens to the debate here, one sees that the alternative, namely the opposition, is split in different directions even on this issue. It is not a united front. Someone objects to the proposal but does not think we go far enough, while others in the opposition say that we should not do this. We also see in this area that there is no united alternative.

The Tidö parties have charted a new course for Sweden. In just this area, it means a course that strengthens the work line, strengthens companies and strengthens young people's opportunities. We continue with our important work of change.

(Applause)

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

Jakob Olofsgård (L)

Madam Speaker! We all certainly remember those first jobs. We might not have understood it then, but they influenced the rest of our lives in one way or another. For my part, it was about, as a 20-year-old in the summer, getting to work with tourism in the Småland highlands. I drove a small train that wound its way through the streets of Eksjö wooden town while I guided in German.

Next summer, I got a job in one of Gothenburg's many ports, at a café where we supported youth who had gone astray. During my studies, I got one of the most beautiful jobs a folkpartist can ever get: I got to work in a bookstore.

Youth unemployment remains at a high level. Young people who have been unemployed for a longer period experience significantly less faith in the future, are less satisfied with their lives, and have less opportunity to influence their lives than other young people, according to MUCF.

Behind every unemployment figure is a young person who has submitted that well-formulated CV but who time and again is met with silence or a negative response. In the statistics, it is called youth unemployment, but in reality, it is about missed opportunities, life starts that are delayed, and a growing feeling of being left out.

Sweden is in a prolonged recession. Companies hesitate, and investments are postponed. When uncertainty increases, employers become more cautious, and we know what happens then: It is those without experience who are sorted out first – the young.

Madam Speaker! The state shall not replace the labor market, but it shall ensure that more people get the chance to enter it. Therefore, the government's proposal for a temporary reduction of employer contributions for young people between 18 and 23 years of age is both wise and necessary.

The proposal is clear: Employers pay only the old-age pension fee as well as half of the other fees and the general wage fee on wages up to 25,000 kronor per month. The reform is time-limited – from April 2026 to September 2027 – and is aimed at a specific problem in a specific economic situation.

So this is not a permanent tax cut. This is a cyclical tool, because when the economy slows down, it is not enough to hope that jobs will appear on their own. Politics must sometimes lower the thresholds so that more people dare to hire.

For a small business owner in retail or a restaurant owner, every new hire is about taking a risk. "Can we bear the cost if demand fails? Can we afford to give someone without experience a chance?" When we now lower the employer contribution, we reduce exactly that risk.

Madam Speaker! There has been talk about research here. There is research in the area, among others from the Handelns Forskningsinstitut, which clearly shows that the level of the employer contribution for young people affects employment, especially for groups that are far from the labor market. When the cost of hiring decreases, the probability that people actually get a job increases. This applies in particular to young people who have not yet had the chance to build a resume. That is why the reform is aimed specifically at the age group 18–23 years. The older one becomes, the greater the probability that one has already established oneself through education or work experience.

It is also economic responsibility not to spend more but to spend smarter.

Madam Speaker! We often speak of competitiveness in big words. But competitiveness begins in the small things – in the shop that dares to hire an extra young person, in the café that can stay open a little longer, and in companies that choose to expand instead of scaling back.

Trade, tourism, and restaurants are Sweden's largest gateway to the working life for young people. I am pleased that we have young people here in the gallery. We are currently debating how it should become easier for you to enter the labor market and get that first job, the summer job, or to work and study at the same time.

This government wants to make it easier for you to enter the labor market, get a job, feel pride, and earn some money. A reduction of the employer contribution for young people by around one-third can be the difference between a yes and a no when you apply for a job, between unemployment and working life, between standing outside and standing inside. This first job might not just be about economics. It is about feeling that one is independent, feeling that one is important and needed, and ultimately feeling that it is meaningful to work.

This early establishment in the labor market also increases the chances of employment later in life. Every young person who gets their first job thus strengthens not only their own future but also Sweden's long-term economy. It is not solely a cost we are talking about today. It is an investment – in you young people.

Educational initiatives, labor market policy and transition opportunities – yes, these are also crucial complements. But we as a society need to invest both in people's competence and in companies' opportunities to create these jobs, because in every recession there are choices. Either we accept that an entire generation has to wait for their chance to get a job, or we act and keep the doors open.

This is a proposal for exactly such an action. It is temporary, it is targeted, and it is responsible. And, perhaps most importantly of all, it sends a signal to Sweden's young people that society does not give up when times are difficult. When the thresholds into the labor market become higher, politics must make them lower. When companies hesitate, we must make it easier for them to dare. And when young people risk being left behind, we must open more paths to get in.

(Applause)

The deliberation was hereby concluded.

(A decision was to be taken on 25 February.)

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