Temporary reduction of value-added tax on food
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
V wants to see economic security and believes that the government has worsened the conditions for the most vulnerable 1. V wants high-income earners to pay more in tax in favor of single mothers 2 and supports tax cuts for these people 3. SD argues that they have made historical investments in infrastructure 4 and that the VAT reduction is an important measure in a recession 5. M believes that the government has strengthened the economy through reduced taxes on work and pension 6. V wants a price cap on food 7. C sees the reduction as a way to ease things for households 8. KD believes that the VAT reduction is a targeted measure for all households 8. MP argues that the government's and SD's policy is late and insufficient 9. L believes that the VAT reduction benefits all citizens 10.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Speakers (13)
Marie Olsson (S)
Madam Speaker! I move for the approval of the Committee on Taxation's report SkU9 regarding the temporary reduction of value-added tax on food.
Today we are debating the Committee on Taxation's report on temporarily lowering the value-added tax on food from 12 to 6 percent from April 1 of this year until December 31, 2027. It is a report that all parties in this chamber are in complete agreement on.
One might then ask why we should debate a question at all where we are in agreement. In this case, I believe it is about all the parties that have raised this in our respective budgets wanting to speak about why we see that it is important at the current time to lower the VAT on food.
Instead of strengthening ordinary people's finances, the government has worsened the economic conditions for the most vulnerable by making it more expensive to collect medicines, worsening the housing allowance for families with children, and lowering the allowance for those who have been unemployed for more than 100 days. The government stands passive as the child allowance is eroded, and now we also have the skyrocketing electricity prices.
Ordinary people have had to take the economic hit while high-income earners have received large tax cuts. It is a prioritization that is not only unfair but has also actually proven to be harmful to growth.
Madam Speaker! We Social Democrats want to see a Sweden characterized by economic security and social safety, where everyone can grow and live a good life. But today, the development is heading in the wrong direction. For many, the most fundamental dreams feel far away when food is expensive, rents are rising, electricity prices are skyrocketing, and one is forced to turn over every penny to make everyday life work.
The increasing economic inequalities hit the individual hard and also risk increasing tensions in the country at a time when cohesion is needed most.
Food prices have increased by 30 percent since the cost crisis began. For an average family with children, food costs have increased by more than 30,000 kronor per year. Lack of competition is driving up prices. We Social Democrats have for several years proposed a long series of measures to press down food prices and increase competition in the food market. The government has chosen not to act, until the last budget of the mandate period where they listened to our demands for a temporarily lowered food VAT and a food price commission. The purpose of the food price commission is to ensure that the VAT reduction actually leads to lower prices for consumers.
In a survey that Nordea conducted in the middle of January this year, it appears that 71 percent of Swedes do not believe in lowered food prices despite the fact that we are now making decisions to lower the food VAT. That says a lot about the trust that the owners of the food corporations will actually ensure that prices are lowered. For that very reason, it is extremely important to monitor that the reduction has an impact for the consumers. We must simply ensure that the lowered food VAT is not taken out in higher profits.
During economic crises, it is always those with the smallest margins who are hit hardest. The consequences are clearly felt for families with children, and the inequality between families increases. The consequences are also clearly felt for those pensioners who are worst off. They have difficulty covering the most basic everyday expenses.
Madam Speaker! Single parents with low incomes are hit particularly hard. Almost one-third of single parents state that they have difficulty eating enough to be full. Unfortunately, no representatives from the parties belonging to the SD government were out and met the association Makalösa Föräldrar when they stood outside the Riksdag and offered oatmeal. I believe it would have been extremely useful for them to hear these parents' stories.
Several of these parents are single. They work full-time but still have an enormous difficulty making the money stretch. They primarily try to ensure that the children get food and forgo it themselves. They ensure that the children eat properly in school or preschool, because when the children come home, it can be the case that what is served is oatmeal. It is not even certain that there is milk for the oatmeal.
These are hard-working people who contribute to society. They are deprioritized by the government so that those who earn a lot can get even more.
For us Social Democrats, it is a self-evident matter that children should not have to pay for crises. That ambition does not seem to be shared by the government. Child poverty is increasing, and Sweden now has the highest level in the Nordic countries. It is nothing to be proud of.
In the SD-government's Sweden, that is what Peps Persson sang. I apologize for the swearing and for not saying it in a Scanian accent. Peps sang: It is false mathematics that makes the poor so poor and the rich so damn rich. This is a development that is unworthy of a welfare country like Sweden.
The Finance Minister has also announced that there is no room for any measures moving forward. It is astonishing to hear the Finance Minister talk about the fact that tough priorities will be required moving forward. The right-wing government has emptied the barns again. One has chosen to use borrowed money to lower taxes for those who earn the most, and now they say the money is finished.
This is a recurring pattern. Every time we have a moderate Finance Minister, it is the Swedish people who pay the price. The criticism from the Fiscal Policy Council is also not lenient.
This must be stopped. The Swedish people deserve better. The Swedish people deserve a new government and a new direction for Sweden.
Jimmy Ståhl (SD)
Madam Speaker! It was interesting to listen to Marie Olsson's speech. Everything is the fault of SD and the government. I will take the opportunity to give some examples of what the government and SD have done during the mandate period.
We have ensured that families with children get 5,000 kronor more in their wallets per month compared to 2022. We have made historical investments in infrastructure and research. We have ensured that companies have received better conditions and lower costs. We have created the conditions for new nuclear power and a better energy system.
We have lowered the tax on gasoline and diesel. We have lowered the tax on work and pension. We have lowered the tax on savings. We have lowered the electricity tax. We have increased the housing allowance. We have lowered the tax for partial ownership in private companies.
Madam Speaker! It is not our fault that electricity prices are sky-high today. Ringhals 1, Ringhals 2, Forsmark 1, Forsmark 2, Oskarshamn 1 and Oskarshamn 2 are six plants that were shut down by the red-green government. Instead, they chose to invest in wind power, which stands still on the coldest days in Sweden. That is why electricity prices are skyrocketing. They blame this on the SD government even though they themselves shut down nuclear power plants that could have provided cheap electricity. It is this that makes it so that families with children cannot afford to eat food. That is why SD and the government are lowering food prices. It is nothing that the Social Democrats should beat their breasts over.
How are we to solve the electricity crisis, according to the Social Democrats?
ANDRE VICE TALMANNEN
I want to remind that the debate is about a temporary reduction of value-added tax on food, so that we do not lose sight of that issue.
Marie Olsson (S)
Madam Speaker! I shall try to stick to the subject, but I first want to answer the member. If one has read a little about nuclear power, one knows that the decisions to close nuclear power plants were business-related. I think we can at least stick to the facts in this chamber.
We Social Democrats have a better policy for ordinary people. You only have to do the math on our budget. Ordinary people would earn more with the Social Democratic budget than with the SD government's budget. I choose to say the SD government, Jimmy Ståhl, because you in SD are actually part of that constellation and support this budget proposal.
It is actually only those who earn a lot who would lose out on our budget proposal. Jimmie Åkesson and Elisabeth Svantesson would get 6,000 kronor less. They would lose out on it, but we think it is right. We think that people who earn a lot can pay a little more in tax for the benefit of those I described earlier, for example, single mothers who cannot eat their fill.
It is not worthy of a welfare country like Sweden that such a policy is pursued. We need to support these people. They are hard-working people. It is just a matter of changing jobs, some party leaders have said. But we actually need people who work in elderly care. We need people in health and care.
Jimmy Ståhl (SD)
Madam Speaker! I respect that the debate is about reduced tax on food, but there is a need to talk about why these reductions must be made. The Social Democrats stand and say that it is due to the market, but that is a truth with qualifications. If one makes an energy system so terribly expensive that it is impossible to make ends meet, it obviously has effects. It does not become profitable when one removes all possibilities to work with an energy system. I see no strangeness at all in blaming this on the Social Democrats and other parties who were involved in governing.
Enough said about that. Regarding tax cuts, I do not think Jimmie Åkesson has any problem with earning 6,000 less. The problem with the Social Democrats' policy is that even families with children get increased taxes. That is what the Social Democrats do with their coalition partners. They raise tax after tax after tax. It surprised me very much that the Social Democrats thought it was a good solution to lower the VAT on food. It is not often one hears that the Social Democrats want to lower taxes, Madam Speaker. I have, in any case, not heard it many times.
We have talked about making it so that families with children get more money in their pockets, so that one does not need to make these cuts. It is required that one has an economy and can live one's life. Today, the costs are sky-high in the form of electricity prices. I heard nothing from Marie Olsson about how to solve that part, Madam Speaker.
Marie Olsson (S)
Madam Speaker! Unlike the member, who says that everything is the Social Democrats' fault, I want to devote myself to speaking about what we actually want to do to make things easier for these families, who are having a tough time today, and for single mothers who have not received 5,000 kronor in tax cuts per month.
The example with 5,000 kronor is based on an average family. If you work in elderly care and are single, you may have received 200 or 300 kronor in tax reduction per month. At the same time, you have been deprived of the enhanced housing supplement. Food prices have skyrocketed. Electricity prices are skyrocketing. It does not add up with a tax cut. In that case, you have lost more from this government's policy, even if the government lowers the taxes.
We stand behind the tax cuts for these people. It is not true that we say no to all tax cuts. We say yes to tax cuts for these people. We do, however, say no to tax cuts for those who earn very much, because we do not think they need tax cuts.
Jimmy Ståhl (SD)
Madam Speaker! I move to approve the government bill, which lowers the VAT on food from today's 12 percent to 6 percent.
Jimmie Åkesson said in his spring speech at Långholmen on May 3, 2025, that we would get an SD-kasse. Food prices are too high, and now we see the result of a negligent work. It is an important measure given that we are in a prolonged Swedish economic recession with high unemployment.
I guess you all remember that SD and the government have fought an inflation inherited from the red-green government. Inflation was in double digits and placed Sweden in a very difficult economic situation.
The reduction obligation was a hard blow and made both companies and private individuals poorer. Fuel prices skyrocketed, which affected everything in society: the farmers' costs for fueling machinery and deliveries from farmers to factories, from factories to stores, and from stores to homes. We must also not forget the costs for public transport, which spiraled out of control, which forced the regions to make cuts and led to poorer service for the citizens.
The interest rates for housing loans spiraled with inflation, which further complicated the situation. SD and the government have succeeded in changing the reduction obligation and bringing down fuel prices from sky-high levels of nearly 30 kronor per liter.
We must not forget that fuel prices would have increased even further and had even more catastrophic consequences for society if the previous government had been allowed to continue with its increasing reduction obligation. Now, fuel prices are acceptable, and interest rates have fallen. But many still suffer from what has been. We hope to be able to give households a reprieve through a lowered food VAT.
All households benefit because food prices are falling. Naturally, SD and the government will follow up on this measure to ensure that the VAT reduction has as great an impact as possible. The tax cut shall reach the households in the form of lower food prices.
We have a strong belief that the stores will respect the VAT reduction and deliver price reductions. Dialogues have previously taken place with the retailers regarding the high prices, so they know very well what SD and the government have for ambitions with the reduction. The VAT will be lowered on April 1, 2026, and the plan is for the reduction to apply until December 31, 2027. We in SD are prepared to extend it if we assess that the economy does not recover as we wish.
Crister Carlsson (M)
Madam Speaker! We are debating SkU9 Temporary reduction of value-added tax on food. I move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.
The legislative changes are intended to apply from 1 April 2026 up to and including 31 December 2027.
The mandate period began with high inflation that pushed Sweden into a recession, and since then we have had to manage the turbulence that has followed trade wars and tariff threats.
When important trading partners such as Germany are performing weakly, we cannot count on assistance from abroad. This has required that both welfare and households have been actively supported, and when inflation and interest rates have fallen, measures have been required to jump-start Swedish growth.
The government has strengthened the economy for ordinary, hard-working people. A family with children gets to keep approximately 1,800 kronor more per month with the government's policy. Taxes have been lowered on, among other things, work and pension, and the preschool fee has been lowered. Also, the tax on savings has been lowered.
The Swedes get significantly more left to live on. Even the reduction of the reduction obligation plays a large role for people, especially for those who, like me, live where public transport does not function as it does here in Stockholm, where one can just stand at a stop and a bus will come. 500–600 kronor per refueling matters for a nursing assistant who might have to commute several kilometers per shift. After more than 30 years in healthcare, I know what it is like to turn over every krona.
The reduced employer contribution for young people also means that, for example, the individual grocer may be able to employ one more young person.
The reason why we are now lowering the food VAT is that many families are finding it difficult to make ends meet. Food prices have increased for a longer period. Now we have brought down inflation, which is the root of the rising food prices, and the food price increases have decreased. Therefore, we are now ensuring that the VAT on food is lowered, albeit temporarily, because many people need temporary financial support in the form of lower food prices so that their private finances are strengthened.
All Swedes get cheaper food bags. For a family with children, it could mean that the food bag becomes 6,500 kronor cheaper per year. For a household with two pensioners, the food bag could become 4,400 kronor cheaper per year.
Those who earn the least receive the largest cost reduction in relation to their incomes. One can draw a parallel to the fact that tax increases hit those who have the smallest margins the hardest.
The temporarily reduced food VAT will also contribute to the economic recovery. If families have more money left over after they have bought food, they can perhaps spend the money, which strengthens the economy.
Tax revenues are estimated to decrease by 16 billion kronor in 2026 and by 21 billion kronor in 2027.
Madam Speaker! Voices have been raised that the grocery giants and especially a certain grocery chain are making enormous profits, as some call it, and there are those who want to introduce a new agency to keep track of this. Introducing a new agency just to keep track seems quite strange and less well-thought-out when it is a temporary legislative change, and above all, it becomes expensive. We should instead reduce the number of agencies.
But I partly agree. A watchful eye can be in place since there are also food chains tied to the left side that are making billion-dollar losses but do not have lower prices for it. One must keep track that they do not cover their losses through the lowered food VAT.
How do you ensure that the reduced food VAT will actually lead to lower food prices? This is ultimately up to the grocery stores. Here, it is expected that the food giants will take their responsibility. We take our responsibility through reduced food VAT, and now the food giants must act.
A food price commission will be established which shall closely monitor the development of food prices. The Consumer Agency will be tasked, together with other agencies, such as the National Institute of Economic Research, the Competition Authority and SCB, to monitor the price development.
The profit margin for the retailers is approximately 2–3 percent. Some earn large sums of money, many manage to break even, and others live on the margin.
Special low-price stores are missing in many municipalities. Better competition within the grocery trade can contribute to pressed prices, increased accessibility, and a better selection for households.
I visited the shop in Sörsjön some time ago. It is a small place in northern Dalarna that doesn't even have 100 inhabitants and where it is a long way to the next village with a shop. I can say that they definitely won't get rich from their trade there, but they are happy if they can continue to keep it open and make it work. So, not all shopkeepers are making a killing, on the contrary.
Now we are lowering the food VAT temporarily. Then we will follow the development and see what effect this has. One can, however, be certain that we and our coalition parties always have the best interests of hard-working people in mind. It should pay to work.
Ilona Szatmári Waldau (V)
Madam Speaker! Food prices have skyrocketed in recent years, and many Swedes testify that they cannot afford to eat their fill. Half of all single parents with low income have, at one or more occasions, not been able to afford to buy nutritious food for themselves and their children. At the beginning of last year, a total of 276,000 children lived in economic hardship. The number of children in economic hardship has increased during this government.
"If my children feel a bit sick or don't want to go to school, I say 'Go to school, eat food, and then come home if you have to'." So says the mother of four, Lana, to the newspaper. She cannot afford to arrange lunch for her children. When the children did not get food in school this summer, she lost about ten kilos, as she reduced her own food portions so that the children could eat until they were full. Is this how we want it in Sweden?
Statistics from SCB show that the number of poor people in Sweden has doubled in five years. Now, 730,000 people are counted as poor, and a large proportion of them state that they cannot afford to eat a meal with protein even every other day. Since the threshold for the high-cost protection for medicine was raised by the right-wing majority, more people must choose between the more expensive medicine and the increasingly expensive food.
The price increases on food are the biggest household crisis in 40 years, as food prices have increased by over 30 percent in three years. Food costs for a family with two children have increased by approximately 2,800 kronor every month. It is the food wholesalers and the stores rather than the producers who are responsible for the cost increase. The Competition Authority's analysis shows that the price of basic goods increased more in the store than the price at the producer. The stores have simply taken the opportunity to increase their margins. A few strong actors on the Swedish food market are keeping prices up, and the government has stood helpless in the face of the price increases for the entire mandate period.
The government has, prior to the VAT reduction we are discussing today, done nothing to protect household incomes. After three years of austerity with the Tidö parties, the government is now emptying the treasury and letting welfare and the budget for coming years bear the cost. By refraining from investing for a long period, the government and Sverigedemokraterna have cemented the recession and placed us at the top of the EU when it comes to the number of unemployed. At the same time, more unemployed people receive reduced benefits and find it even harder to cover everyday costs such as food, electricity, and rent.
Madam Speaker! The tax cut on food is welcome provided that the entire tax cut benefits the consumers. To ensure this, the Left Party has submitted proposals for a price guarantee that would guarantee lower food prices on April 1st this year. We have proposed a price cap on food to prevent companies from secretly raising prices and then giving consumers the impression of a price reduction.
We have also proposed that the State Competition Authority (Statens pris- och kartellnämnd) be reintroduced and that the government takes responsibility to ensure that households receive the 21 billion that the tax cut costs. There is a risk that otherwise it will only become an Icabidrag when the food giants do not lower prices correspondingly to the VAT reduction.
Vänsterpartiet proposed for several decades that the VAT on food should be lowered and eventually completely abolished. ”Away with VAT on food” was a slogan that was heard far beyond our party. It was a policy that was right back then.
Today, the Left Party has no other proposal than the committee's, that is to say, we move for approval of the bill on reduced VAT on food. But that does not mean that the Left Party considers that reduced VAT on food will solve the problem of child poverty or with parents going to bed hungry because they have prioritized food for their children. No, not even if the entire VAT reduction comes to the consumer will it solve the problem of poverty.
In order for Sweden to once again become a good country to live in for everyone, more investments are required than that. Increased child allowance, a fair tax system, support for families with children, and a sickness and unemployment insurance benefit that it is possible to live on are some of the measures that are needed, so that no one has to forgo food for economic reasons.
Until the 90s, Sweden was a pioneer for an equalizing welfare policy, with around 35 percent of GDP. Now we are no longer a pioneer, but instead, Sweden lies below the EU average when it comes to social protection. It is time to once again become a pioneer in welfare policy. Sweden does not just need lower food prices. Sweden does not just need a new government. Sweden needs a completely new policy.
Daniel Bäckström (C)
Madam Speaker! In today's report, we move for approval of the proposal before us regarding a reduction of the value-added tax on food from 12 to 6 percent. The issue has been topical for a long time, not least in view of the price developments of recent years.
We have received various explanatory models for how the price developments have come to be. I think back to my time in the Committee on Environment and Agriculture but also the Committee on Defence when we followed what happened both before and after Russia's invasion of Ukraine. It happened very quickly: skyrocketing fuel costs, sharply increased gas prices and fewer input goods. The market was affected, and security of supply and flows changed. We saw clear changes in the supply chains. This had effects on food production, not least among producers in Sweden, who in turn gradually also increased costs and prices in stores.
We are in a situation where there is uncertainty regarding how the world will develop in the coming years and also during the 21 months ahead that remain for the proposal in the chamber today. The temporary reduction applies until December 31, 2027. What will happen in parallel during these months? What will happen in the world around us to the west and to the east? How will inflation and cost developments be affected? That is something to consider when we talk about measures that we expect to have an effect in the store.
Parallel to this, we want the recession to break and lead to more jobs, more companies, and increased drivers in the Swedish economy. But many households are having a tough time. Many are struggling with the consequences of layoffs, closures, bankruptcies, and the sky-high unemployment rate overall.
Swedish households are also being pressured in these days by the high electricity prices. At home in Säffle it was 19 degrees cold this morning, and in the rest of Sweden there are also many measurements with sub-zero temperatures.
Household economy constitutes a whole, and many different factors influence what purchasing power and what space exists. The combination of higher electricity prices, higher grid fees, and new complicated power tariffs meant that the latest electricity bill led to a major shock.
More electricity bills are soon to be paid by Swedish households. The government parties promised lower electricity prices during the election campaign, but instead, the electricity bill has become a major burden and also a large share of the expenses for many.
Madam Speaker! The Centre Party has long advocated for a halving of the food VAT to 6 percent. It is part of a central package that we would like to see in order to facilitate and strengthen Swedish food production and to make the grocery bag cheaper for our households. It leaves people with more money in their pockets, and it lowers costs. It hopefully also curbs consumption and saving. But it is important to follow up and see the outcome and what effect it really has for Swedish households in the short term.
Lowering the food VAT also improves the conditions for agriculture to produce more, better and more affordable food. It is important that profitability is and becomes stronger. Competitiveness can also be improved in these times.
In the extension, such a measure can also contribute to a more secure food supply and a stronger preparedness. Furthermore, it is always important to note the value of long-term thinking and predictability, as well as the value of stable conditions and changes, both when it concerns households and when it concerns the companies' opportunities to develop.
We need to see initiatives in several areas. Temporary measures do not always create the best conditions, and therefore it is important to continue the reasoning about what provides predictability and stability over time.
Our focus, Mr. Speaker, lies on reducing the total cost burden for Swedish food producers, while simultaneously looking at the overall picture for Swedish household economics. We have submitted several committee initiatives, including one in the Committee on Taxation a couple of years ago to investigate the state's total levies in all stages of the food chain and propose reforms that increase profitability for agriculture and strengthen farmers' competitiveness. Unfortunately, this initiative was voted down by almost all parties present at the meeting, but the issue remains just as relevant. We believe it is an unacceptable situation that for every krona the farmer contributes, the state takes 11 öre, and 10 öre goes to the farmer. This says something about what the state's impact on profitability and competitiveness looks like.
Regarding other reductions in the VAT area, we can also see that the reduction of the restaurant VAT had an effect and generated thousands of jobs, not least in industries where young and low-educated people received opportunities.
Mr. Speaker! Lower food VAT is therefore not just a question of lower prices, but it is about strengthening the entire food chain and increasing our self-sufficiency. It is also about strengthening our preparedness in a time when we need to do everything to secure the conditions for redundancy and resilience and for our ability to provide for ourselves, because there are so many factors pointing to the fact that it is becoming increasingly insecure in our global environment.
Cecilia Engström (KD)
Mr. Speaker! We are debating a reduced value-added tax on food from 12 to 6 percent.
For the Christian Democrats, it is important to support families who testify to how the margins have shrunk month by month. It is especially child-rearing families, single parents, and elderly people with small pensions who feel every krona when they stand at the checkout.
Food is not a luxury. Food is a necessity. When food prices rise, all households are affected. But high food prices hit hardest those who have the least economic room. Therefore, it is reasonable that the state, in a difficult economic situation, uses the tools available to temporarily ease the burden.
A reduction of the VAT on food is a broad and accurate measure in the sense that it covers all households. The government assesses that the tax cuts have a high probability of directly impacting prices, and that is crucial. The purpose is clear: a reduction should be felt in the wallet, not stop anywhere else in the value chain. That is what we have agreed upon with the grocery stores.
Previously, the government has lowered fuel taxes, and the reduction obligation has been significantly reduced. This has had a major effect on fuel prices. Significantly lowered fuel prices have also increased households' economic margins in a relatively well-known way. But it is easy to forget that lower fuel prices actually also make food cheaper, because transport costs are a significant part of food prices. Such indirect effects on household finances are easy to forget when we summarize the combined effect of the government's economic initiatives for households. Without these initiatives, the households' economic situation would have been significantly worse. Now we see an optimism that is slowly but surely beginning to sprout in our country.
For the Christian Democrats, the family perspective is central. Policy should strengthen households' opportunities to take responsibility, plan their daily lives, and feel security. When the state can contribute to lowering the costs for the most basic food on the table, it is a priority we stand behind in this economic situation.
Mr. Speaker! At the same time, it is important to safeguard the state's finances. The value-added tax is a stable source of revenue. We also welcome the government's ambition to closely monitor the price impact through Matpriskollen. They are already conducting measurements from August last year, when the decision became public. Their first report will arrive as early as March, before the VAT reduction is implemented. They will then continue to monitor food prices throughout the entire period.
The decisive factor is that the tax cut will actually benefit households in the form of lower food prices. Transparency and follow-up strengthen confidence in the policy.
Food is a necessity for all households. A VAT reduction on food is by definition broad. In a situation where almost all households have been pressured by high prices and a low economic climate, the breadth is a strength. It reaches the family with children in rental housing, the retiree in the countryside, and single parents without them needing to apply, qualify, or wait for a decision. It is simple, direct, and administratively efficient.
Mr. Speaker! For the Christian Democrats, policy is based on people's everyday lives. When times are difficult, society must be there, through concrete reforms that strengthen household economies here and now.
Lowering the VAT on food is such a reform. It is broad, it is clear, and it meets a real need in Swedish homes. With this, I move for approval of the committee's proposal.
Malte Tängmark Roos (MP)
Mr. Speaker! I would like to begin by saying that Miljöpartiet welcomes the proposal to lower the VAT on food, and we will vote yes to it at the vote next week.
Miljöpartiet was the first party in the Riksdag to propose a reduced food VAT, already on 14 February 2023, which is exactly three years and five days ago. Our proposal then was to completely remove the VAT on specific basic goods such as bread, flour, milk, fruit and vegetables because this design would make the biggest difference for those who are struggling most financially. People with low incomes purchase just that type of cheaper basic goods to a higher degree.
We see no reason, however, to say no to the proposal for a halving of the VAT on all food items today and will, as said, vote yes to the proposal next week.
It does not mean, Mr. Speaker, however, that I am particularly satisfied with how this government has handled the cost crisis during the mandate period. The government's and the Sverigedemokraternas policy to support households can most simply be described in two words: late and insufficient.
The reduction of the food VAT is an example of this. It was already in February 2023, during the height of the cost crisis, that Miljöpartiet proposed the removal of food VAT on basic goods. At that time, our proposal was met with compact resistance from the government and Sverigedemokraterna. Absolutely not, was the answer then.
Some alternative proposal, such as the one we are debating now, was not relevant then. But now, three years later, when it is an election year and votes must be fished from people who for several years have seen their wallets shrink, the Tidö parties are suddenly ready to commit. It is very late, and it is quite transparent.
Mr. Speaker! We have heard alarm reports every year during this parliamentary term. The cries have become louder and louder with each passing year. The number of children growing up in poverty is skyrocketing in Sweden. The proportion of parents who need to borrow money to pay for food, electricity, and rent has increased. The number of evictions affecting children has increased. The proportion of families who cannot afford nutritious food and to eat their fill every day has increased.
In the Prime Minister's Question Time in December, Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson answered me: In a recession, it will always be tougher. In an economic boom, it becomes easier. That is how it has always been.
That is true, but it is actually the government's and our politicians' responsibility to facilitate for households in crisis and to ensure that the recession affects society's most vulnerable as little as possible. In that case, it cannot be avoided that the government and the Sweden Democrats have betrayed Sweden's families with children. The government has not once during this mandate period, despite skyrocketing cost increases, raised the child allowance and the maintenance support. The child allowance has actually lost a full 25 percent of its purchasing power since the increase in 2018 and is now worth less than it has been in 50 years.
The increase in the housing allowance that the Tidö parties implemented at the turn of the year was less than half of what they themselves reduced the housing allowance by just one year earlier. And now during the spring, the government's and the Sverigedemokraternas large poverty reform is being launched, which all referral bodies agree will increase child poverty and exclusion for the most vulnerable households. It is quite simply the exact opposite of the responsibility that we politicians are supposed to take.
Mr. Speaker! The Tidö parties' policy for households is late, and it is insufficient. But I would like to add a word to my description: unfair.
Instead of strengthening our common security systems and investing in the households most in need, the government and the Sweden Democrats have prioritized tax cuts that, in crowns and öre, benefit those with the very highest incomes.
Instead of repairing the cracks in the sickness insurance and raising and indexing the child allowance, the maintenance support, and the housing allowance – which would have provided a lasting higher income for the families who need it the most – they have chosen small and often temporary measures for low-income earners while simultaneously withdrawing the support entirely for those in greatest need. And instead of strengthening labor market measures when unemployment is at record levels, the Tidö parties have worsened the unemployment insurance.
Mr. Speaker! Sweden deserves better than the government we have today. Sweden deserves a government that works actively and committedly to break child poverty. Sweden deserves a government that prioritizes families with children over bank directors and that prioritizes low-income earners over low taxes. Sweden deserves a true welfare society, where all children grow up in security.
That is why Miljöpartiet invests in households, not only with reduced food VAT but also with real welfare policy. That is why Miljöpartiet invests in families with children and in low-income earners. Our view is clear and distinct: No child should grow up in poverty or hunger. With our policy, this can also become possible.
Anders Ekegren (L)
Mr. Speaker! I will actually begin by paying a tribute to Daniel Bäckström, who I thought gave this chamber some different perspectives. With many speeches, one already knows what they are going to be about, but I thought that Daniel Bäckström broadened this debate in a good and pleasant way.
Mr. Speaker! Under the previous government, households and companies experienced extensive inflation – of double-digit proportions – and sharp interest rate increases, which the current government has combated. Now inflation is at the inflation target level, and now all borrowers receive an interest rate that is much lower than before. Added to this are tax cuts in various areas. It is a reduction of the electricity tax and more taxes, which have been mentioned here. The households' economy has been strengthened, and now we will strengthen the households' economy further.
I actually didn't intend to say anything about nuclear power today, because I am sometimes quite irritated that these debates can be about just about anything. It would not surprise me if the next debate about the forest is about how we should ensure that the forest starts growing in Iceland. It is entirely possible in this chamber. But the reason why we have the high electricity prices is exactly what Jimmy Ståhl said earlier. There was something called a capacity tax on nuclear power. It was raised a lot, especially from 2015 onwards. One can see in various investigations that a third of the costs consisted of this capacity tax. That simply made it unprofitable to continue operating the nuclear power. But it is certainly a sensitive issue.
At the Finance Committee's open meeting on Tuesday regarding the evaluation of the Riksbank's monetary policy, Professor Lars Calmfors answered a direct question from me: That the Riksbank raised the interest rate from 3.5 percent to 4 percent and remained at this level for too long meant that one actually prolonged the recession, and it has resulted in a GDP drop of 0.5 percent.
Mr. Speaker! The Tidö parties have therefore agreed to implement a temporary reduction of the VAT on food from 12 percent to 6 percent during the period from 1 April 2026 to 31 December 2027. It was needed to provide households with increased economic space and, not least, to stimulate the Swedish economy. One can always discuss which measures should be taken. The advantage of a reduction of the VAT on food is that all citizens benefit from the measure and not just those who drive a Tesla.
We seem to be in very much agreement in this chamber that it is very important to ensure that this VAT reduction is actually fully implemented. The Food Price Commission will therefore have an important role, and my assessment is that the food industry is under great pressure from citizens, the media, and Members of Parliament, who will obviously see that this VAT reduction goes through.
Had there been alternatives? Yes, one alternative could have been tax cuts. This has been implemented before. A Tidö colleague told me: When we did it, some S-controlled municipalities and regions took the opportunity to raise taxes for the citizens, which meant they did not receive as much as was intended. It did not have the effect that was intended. Some who lived in the wrong municipality or the wrong region were simply cheated.
Therefore, it is obviously important that controls by the food price commission, pensioner organizations, media, and others who are interested in the issues lead to effective monitoring.
Mr. Speaker! With this, I move for approval of the committee's proposal for a decision.
The deliberation was hereby concluded.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.