The Swedish Payments Authority
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
S considers that the Disbursement Authority is an important contribution to counter organized crime abusing the welfare systems 1. SD stands behind the proposal but is skeptical about the creation of more authorities 2. M argues that the previous government was negligent and that the authority is a first step in the right direction 3. M hopes that the government acts and sees the problems as an opportunity for people 3. M argues that the problems with payments have increased since 2008 4 5. KD argues that welfare crime is an attack against the weakest and that 18 billion are spent annually on incorrect payments 6. V thinks it is good to start the authority 7. V argues that the biggest problem is that people who are entitled to compensations do not receive them 7. M considers that tax money should be used effectively 8.
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)
Zinaida Kajevic (S)
Mr. Speaker! The work to establish the new Payment Authority was initiated during the previous government and will be an extremely important contribution to counter the organized crime's exploitation and misuse of the common welfare systems for the purpose of enriching themselves financially.
Experience shows that crime, cheating, and fraud are unfortunately both systematic and significant. Organized crime has found a new lucrative market. Gaps between different authorities' areas of responsibility are exploited, and if one manages to get into a system, it can open the doors to more.
The profits from various crime schemes often constitute a basic income in a criminal ecosystem that also frequently includes crimes in the labor market. The profits are often used to finance other crimes such as drug trafficking and extortion activities. The crimes against the common welfare are system-threatening.
To maintain trust in our welfare systems, it is of the utmost importance that their resources are used correctly. The establishment of the new authority is an important step toward creating system-wide control.
Today we also make decisions on new legislation and amendments to the public access and secrecy legislation so that the authority can start its operations at the upcoming turn of the year. The mission is to prevent, preclude, and detect incorrect payments from the welfare systems.
The authority shall also manage a system with transaction accounts for the payment of various subsidies. This applies to Arbetsförmedlingen, CSN, Försäkringskassan, Pensionsmyndigheten and Skatteverket. Certain authorities, a-kassor and credit institutions will also be obliged under certain conditions to provide information to the new authority, which in turn will be obliged to inform the affected actors about incorrect payments and other inaccuracies.
Issues regarding public access and secrecy are regulated so that the information that the Swedish Payments Authority receives is covered by secrecy, and the forms for how personal data shall be processed at the authority are regulated so that other actors can feel secure about it.
Mr. Speaker! The Social Democratic government has been very active in the work to prevent crimes against our welfare systems. For several years now, there have been confidentiality exemptions regarding information exchange between authorities in cases of suspected serious crime. A population registration crime has been introduced, as well as the possibility to check residency. Several authorities have received additional resources to combat welfare crimes and tax evasion. The work to counter errors and abuse of state compensations, grants, and taxes has been strengthened.
The Social Democratic government also submitted several proposals on strengthened cooperation against crime in the labor market and fraud in the road transport sector, and also investigated possibilities to strengthen the exchange of information between authorities, municipalities, and unemployment insurance funds. We look forward to more proposals being submitted by the new government.
Mr. Speaker! Several municipalities, with Södertälje at the forefront, have signaled early on a need for increased measures to counter crime and abuse against our welfare systems. The highlighted home care scandal in just Södertälje a number of years ago, where 35 people were prosecuted for fraud against the municipality and Arbetsförmedlingen, became a wake-up call that has led to a completely new way of thinking about system protection in all municipalities' operations.
It was against the background of the experiences from Södertälje and the forward-looking work there that the previous government decided that the new agency's seat should be placed in Södertälje, which also was in line with the need to increase the state presence throughout the country. We regret that the new government has overturned this decision and chosen to place the agency in Stockholm, and we have noted it in a specific statement in the report.
I vote in favor of the committee's proposal.
David Perez (SD)
Mr. Speaker! I want to begin by saying that the Sweden Democrats support the bill in its entirety and thus the proposal in the Committee on Finance's report, even though there are things that can be improved as the agency begins its work.
Today, the Riksdag decides on a very important proposal. The purpose of the Payment Authority is to prevent, deter, and detect incorrect payments from the welfare systems. I must admit that I am skeptical about the creation of more agencies, especially when we need to conduct a review of our existing agencies.
But with that said, we find ourselves in a serious situation. A recent investigation by the Delegation for Correct Payments from Welfare Systems established that the public sector makes incorrect payments of more than 18 billion kronor per year. To put it into perspective, I can say that it is more money than we have given to Ukraine so far. Between 2008 and 2021, benefit crimes have increased by as much as 133 percent.
We just heard how seriously the opposition views this. It does not show facts.
One might think that the authorities that will now receive reinforced help to investigate payments that have been made and will be made should already have sufficient control mechanisms in place to detect irregularities, but that does not seem to be the case today.
The coalition partners and the opposition are hopeful that a new agency will lead to more inaccuracies being discovered and that we will be able to convict more of the individuals who cheat.
It is worth adding that incorrect payments are an important source of income for organized violent crime in our country. Our common welfare, which grants Swedish citizens a unique economic security, is thus being used to nourish criminal groups all over the country.
The researcher Magnus Ranstorp has long warned about the extensive fraud, which does not only concern our state authorities. The municipalities are also far too irresponsible in their payments. Let me quote an article from yesterday's evening newspaper: "The affair in Botkyrka sheds light on how taxpayers' money is distributed to study circles and the like without sufficient control." This naturally concerns the irregularities that have emerged in Botkyrka municipality – under Social Democratic rule, it may be added. The public sector must stop carelessly paying out funds without sufficient control.
Mr. Speaker! Let me return to the bill that is now on the table.
The government and its supporting parties are not only investing in a new agency. We have also allocated 200 million kronor in the budget specifically to combat incorrect payments. I believe that the new agency could have been more focused on proactive solutions, as it will at least initially lack the ability to see payments in real time. Furthermore, the agency will lack the authority to stop payments if something were to appear. Instead, the agency is expected to contact the party concerned.
We are already wasting valuable time here. If something has been discovered, there should reasonably be tools in place to stop these payments immediately. It is not only the Sverigedemokraterna who put forward this. These are views that have been received from heavy referral bodies such as the Swedish Economic Crime Authority, the Swedish Prosecution Authority, the Swedish Tax Agency, and the Swedish State Service Pension Agency.
With this said, we must be aware that the authority will need a build-up phase. It may take up to three years before it has full analytical capacity. We will therefore return in the future with new proposals and reforms to further sharpen the authority's tools.
When it comes to the concerns raised in connection with the proposal, the restriction of personal privacy is the most important issue that has been discussed. I understand this concern, but here I share the government's and the Council for Legislation's position that the value of combating both crime and incorrect payments outweighs personal privacy in this case.
There is also a risk that our courts will be burdened with more work, especially in a situation where they are already under heavy pressure - even though it is naturally welcome. The investigations that are expected to reveal fraud will also facilitate convictions because complicated schemes will be simpler to clarify in the district court and easier to detect at an early stage thanks to the authorities receiving correct intelligence.
In summary, both we and the public welcome that we have a government that prioritizes crime fighting and welfare crime and works broadly to protect our common welfare, which for far too long has been plundered by criminal groups.
With the new Utbetalningsmyndigheten, we take an important step to ensure that the economic supports go to those who are entitled to them and no one else. There are certainly better things we can spend the money on than paying out 18 billion annually to the wrong individuals. Sweden can do better!
These are funds that could instead be used to lower the employer contribution or to correct the errors in the pension system that we have discovered.
With this said, I move for approval of the proposition. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the secretariat and the others in the Committee on Finance and the Speaker's Presidium for a good job and wish you all a very good summer with some well-deserved leave.
Ida Drougge (M)
Mr. Speaker! Magdalena Andersson squandered over 100 billion kronor during her time as Finance Minister and Prime Minister - that is a low estimate.
The Social Democrats incorrectly paid out between 100 and 150 billion kronor during their eight years in government, according to the National Audit Office and the Swedish National Audit Office. It is over 100 billion kronor that could have gone to families with children struggling to make ends meet or to people who have worked and toiled for an entire working life. They could have gone to people who set their alarm in the morning, get up, work, and contribute to our economy and to developing and making Sweden better. It is money that could have strengthened the school and the healthcare. They could have stayed in people's pockets and done better use there.
But instead, it is estimated that at least 18 billion kronor are paid out incorrectly and due to fraud annually. The fraud has increased by 133 percent since 2008. Therefore, the government is now establishing the Payment Authority as a step toward strengthening the work against fraud.
The police and the Swedish National Audit Office have been sounding the alarm for several years. We Moderates therefore proposed as far back as eight years ago that this payment authority should be swiftly investigated and introduced. Nevertheless, the previous Social Democratic government failed to act quickly. It is a negligence that has allowed serious crime to nestle itself into our social security systems. It is deeply unjust that these thefts are so extensive at the expense of honest and vulnerable people.
Organized crime exploits the systems, and it is one of the most serious threats to our welfare. It is of the utmost importance that we manage our common tax funds responsibly. That is obviously always the case, but when they so obviously go about counteracting the very existence of our entire society and what we build our community on, it is extra serious. Our money should not be used to feed organized crime. Despite this, 18 billion kronor are nevertheless paid out incorrectly every year. This corresponds to approximately the salaries of 26,000 teachers annually. It amounts to more than the entire justice system – police, courts, prosecutors, and Säpo – together spend during one quarter every year. It is clear that the state's ability to combat welfare crime needs to be strengthened, and the Payment Authority is a first step in the right direction.
I and we Moderates are really no big fans of more agencies, on the contrary. But this agency was needed. It should already be in place, and it could already have been in place. The Payment Authority will initially have two primary tasks: to administer a system where we collect payments from the large state agencies and to carry out data analyses and audits of these.
The payments will be cross-referenced with additional information from a number of authorities in Sweden and from the unemployment insurance funds. This concerns the population register, decisions on residence permits and what information served as the basis for decisions on residence permits, decisions on work permits and information regarding companies that perform welfare services in Sweden and their background.
In this way, the state can begin to regain control over the payments that occur. One can begin to ensure that a person who, for example, has moved to serve as a defense minister in Iraq does not continue to receive benefits in Sweden, but also that people, for example, do not cheat themselves into receiving both unemployment insurance and sickness benefit at the same time.
It is shocking – I continue to be repeatedly surprised in these matters – that the control is so deficient. It feels obvious that these are things that we could have solved a long time ago. This has also been criticized by both the Swedish National Audit Office and the Swedish Agency for Public Management in recent years.
Only the changes that we are now implementing are estimated to be able to reduce the incorrect payments by as much as half. In addition, the government is tightening the subsidy crime law so that it also covers companies. A new main rule is introduced in the secrecy legislation so that the starting point is that authorities may and shall share information with each other, as well as improving the population registration and carrying out a census.
It is of the utmost importance that we safeguard the taxpayers' money and that we maintain trust in our welfare system. Inflation is hitting people and companies hard enough, and the government is making major investments to support those who have it the toughest and are most economically vulnerable. People will nevertheless continue to have a tough time for a while. It will take time to turn the development around in Sweden. Then, especially then, it is extra important that the money we have and that we support households with goes to those who need it and not to criminals.
Now the government is taking several steps in the right direction, more steps than the previous government took during eight years.
Mr. Speaker! I would, of course, like to express my approval of the committee's proposed decision.
These were perhaps some gloomy words. But I have a hope that in gloomy and tough times, action can give hope and be an opportunity for people, and that we see the problems that Sweden now has and that we have a government that acts.
I hope that my colleagues, the Speaker's Bureau and the Chancellery have the opportunity to relax and lean back, be hopeful about the future and enjoy a good summer.
Zinaida Kajevic (S)
Mr. Speaker! Member Ida Drougge was extremely upset about the state of affairs. That is exactly how I feel. She mentions that investigations have shown that since 2008, payments have been made on incorrect grounds to a fairly extensive extent. What else can one say but that it is extremely upsetting? I agree. That is not what we want. That is not how we maintain trust in the welfare system.
Ida Drougge forgets, however, that during this period, until 2014, it was her party that sat in power. If she had really wanted to rectify this, one could have started the super-fast investigation process and rectified it extremely quickly. I cannot quite reconcile the member's agitation in the rostrum with the actions that the previous government actually had until 2014.
Ida Drougge is shocked. At the same time, she cannot reach out her hand and understand that we must work together moving forward - we agree, and in the report, we all take a positive stance on this. Our welfare systems must be protected. And when it comes to the way of working with the issues, where the emphasis really lies on this, it should be cross-party.
Ida Drougge (M)
Mr. Speaker! I did not perceive any question, but I will gladly take the opportunity to further develop and substantiate the argument that I have just presented here at the rostrum.
These problems have indeed increased since 2008. The then-Alliance government introduced the subsidy crime law. The then-Alliance government therefore took measures.
Since then, these problems have continued to increase. And it was in 2015, when the Moderaterna presented proposals to quickly establish a payment authority, that also state agencies, agencies and works, and external actors began to advocate for such an authority.
I would of course wish that the alliance government had introduced this in 2006 or that Göran Persson had done it before then - absolutely. But the longer time has passed, the greater the problems have become. We have been able to see during this period that it has gone from being cheating which to some extent is due to people not knowing the systems or perhaps not understanding that they are making mistakes - it is not intentional errors - to being organized crime. Then it is clear that the situation becomes different and that it requires different tools.
It is good that we have a government that is now taking those steps and introducing them.
Zinaida Kajevic (S)
Mr. Speaker! What I understand from Ida Drougge's contribution is that the government until 2014 was passive despite seeing the problems, that for two years after 2014 there was an opportunity to allocate money in the budget to truly ensure that the problems were addressed in such a way that other agencies could be strengthened but it was not done, that the Social Democratic-led government appointed the investigation that has led to the Payment Authority and that last year a special investigator was appointed precisely with the purpose of establishing this agency, which Ida Drougge is ultimately proud of today.
It is also I. I agree that we must work with the problem of system-threatening crime that undermines trust in tax money and that this is an issue where we can agree moving forward.
I also pointed out in my speech that we look forward to more measures from the current government that we can hopefully get in place, because this is something that none of us want to see decline.
Ida Drougge (M)
Mr. Speaker! I can repeat that a previous Moderate-led government before 2014 got the subsidy crime law in place and that measures were taken to tighten the controls that the previous government removed from several of our welfare payments.
Previous governments have acted. The problems have since developed further and acquired elements of more serious organized crime and, in part, a new character. The Moderates proposed in this chamber in 2015 that exactly this should be done, and we then funded both such an investigation and other measures to address the problems.
I would recommend that the member do the historical homework. Then, I naturally welcome the commitment to solving problems ahead. That task cannot gather too many forces. It would be very good.
Hans Eklind (KD)
Mr. Speaker! Welfare crimes are crimes committed at a computer in peace and quiet at the office or at home in the TV sofa. At first glance, it may seem that this actually hits no one, that there are no crime victims. But it hits all taxpayers. Welfare crime is nothing other than a direct attack against society's common safety net, and it hits directly against the most vulnerable. That is my main point. It hits those on sick leave, those with disabilities, pensioners and so on.
If the perception spreads that we do not have control over the system, that is, that it is possible to cheat the state out of benefit money and live well on it, and if that is the result of us not taking the measures required to put a stop to this, then yes, that is a direct attack that hits the very weakest in our society.
The problem is that it is well-documented that fraud actually occurs with payments. It is not an allegation, but calculations show that approximately 18 billion annually go to what is called incorrect payments. Organized crime accounts for 84 percent of this, which means 15 billion annually.
We Christian Democrats believe that our Swedish welfare systems should be fine-meshed and catch those people who are in need of support and help. They must absolutely not function as an ATM for criminals. If we add up what is wrongly paid out annually, it is argued that 300 billion kronor have been paid out incorrectly over the last decades - 300 billion! Imagine if these funds could have been used for welfare and the police and for tax cuts!
Those who follow the debate can ask themselves how it has come to be this way. There are, of course, a number of explanations, but some of them are that measures against welfare crime have been prevented because the authorities' service mandate has taken precedence over the crime prevention work. Furthermore, the authorities have lacked the opportunity to adequately verify certificates and identities. E-identification makes it difficult, yes, almost impossible, for an authority to know who is actually behind an application for benefits. As the crowning touch, we then have this with the secrecy legislation which makes it difficult for the authorities to cooperate.
Furthermore, it is difficult for the authorities to verify what assets exist in bank accounts; they simply cannot obtain such statements. Additionally, after all these years, there is a widespread perception among authorities that it is often futile to report crimes to the police, as the investigations are almost always closed without action.
Mr. Speaker! I therefore think it is a moment of joy when we, in broad agreement, get to make decisions about what can actually be a real tool against the crime that I have begun to speak about, namely a payment authority that is to begin its operations on 1 January 2024.
That such an authority should become a reality is something that we Christian Democrats have advocated for over many years. This authority will provide the tools to prevent, preclude, and detect incorrect payments from the welfare systems.
A payment authority, however, needs to be supplemented by a population census so that we can keep track of which people live and are located here in the country. By providing false population registration data, one can open a door into our welfare systems, something that is exploited by criminals.
Registering one's residence at a different address is super easy. When my middle son moved out of home, he called home on a Friday evening and wondered how it was possible that five additional people lived in his 22-square-meter apartment. I wrote about it on Facebook, and my mother became very upset and stressed about this fact. Where were these five people living? They had simply registered their residence at the address, which my son Hampus found out via some data site that I was told exists.
Many things need to be done here, and that is my point in this debate. It won't be a real debate, as we are in agreement from the parties' side that it is good that this is being done. But I believe that more must be done, and the government has in the budget bill ensured that the funds required for us to be able to carry out a census are allocated.
Mr. Speaker! In the submitted proposition, the government writes that the proposal will have marginal consequences for municipalities and regions. I would, however, like to raise a warning finger. If we now tighten the payments from authorities, it is quite reasonable to expect—as several of the referral bodies, for example the Swedish Security Service, point out—that crime will seek itself out to municipalities and regions. The Christian Democrats' proposal is therefore that all public payments shall be made from one and the same transaction account. There is reason for politicians to be on their toes and monitor this.
Mr. Speaker! It feels undeniably good that we are now taking a first step towards addressing the welfare fraud. It should naturally have been done a long time ago, but now we are here. Now we take this decision. We must also probably take a number of additional steps to truly tackle this.
Yesterday, I thought I was participating in my last debate, and I wished everyone a happy summer and so on. The Speaker was not there then, however, so I take the opportunity to wish the Speaker, the Speaker's Presidium, my dear colleagues in the Finance Committee and, of course, also the other Members of Parliament a very happy Midsummer.
Ali Esbati (V)
Mr. Speaker! I had not signed up for the debate, as this is a report that we have agreed upon. What we heard from several of the members on the right wing here was, however, very strange, I must say.
There was no sign that we are in agreement, and above all, it became a collection of some kind of suggestive speeches from the right-nationalist side. It seemed more aimed at rallying before poor opinion polls now that we are going on summer holiday. A number of misleading and anecdotal pieces of information were presented.
I want to be very clear: That one starts this agency, which is to gather together a number of work tasks that are nevertheless being done, the Left Party thinks is good. We are, as said, completely in agreement on this in the Riksdag. When it comes to the billions that are paid out incorrectly, sometimes on the basis of fraud, it is naturally incredibly bad that it happens. The work to reduce this that has been ongoing for many years should continue.
The image given that is how our welfare systems work - that money is paid out here and there and that it is people within organized crime who receive money from Försäkringskassan or Arbetsförmedlingen - is however not correct at all. The reality that has prevailed in Sweden has rather been that we have major problems with people who are entitled to their benefits not receiving them. That is the development trend we have seen in the recent period.
We do, however, have some areas where there is a very large leakage of money. Enormous amounts of tax crimes were committed, costing Swedish society in the thousands of 40 billion. In those cases, it is the very richest in society who are clearly overrepresented; I will not go into which parties' core voters it often concerns, but I simply state that it is that way.
We also have a system for labor immigration which, in addition to abuses against individuals, has invited enormous amounts of fraud. This has been established by authorities, trade unions, and companies for a long time. There, we could act to obtain both better information and better control.
We have an extreme leakage of money to welfare profiteers from our welfare services. It is a uniquely corruption-inviting system we have in Sweden, and we must do something about it.
In these areas, I look forward to the government parties and the Sweden Democrats perhaps being able to change their positions and priorities, so that we can also reach an agreement there during the time to come.
Ida Drougge (M)
Mr. Speaker! It is almost a bit ironic that Ali Esbati believes that the agitation that parties in Sweden's Riksdag feel over the fact that 18 billion kronor, at a low estimate, disappears annually due to fraud would primarily result in some kind of pressure to be favored in the public opinion. I think that says more about the member himself.
It does not get better, but rather worse, because on one hand we have people who are entitled to benefits but have difficulty obtaining the support and measures they are entitled to, and on the other hand we have people who cheat to get money. It only worsens the situation. It does not mitigate the circumstances in any way, and these things are not in contrast to each other – on the contrary. It would have been easier to be more generous and have simpler regulations for individual individuals who behave correctly if we could stop the cheating. What does the member think about that?
Ali Esbati (V)
Mr. Speaker! I was not born in Sweden, of course, but I still believe that I speak relatively good Swedish. I am therefore a little surprised by the language barrier that seems to have arisen here.
I actually just said these things, and I said that we are in agreement. That was why I reacted a bit to Ida Drougge's post. We are in agreement about what is stated in this committee report - that can be read in the report - and we are in agreement that it is a problem when fraud and incorrect payments occur. It is a major problem because it concerns both the economy and the trust in the system.
What I reacted to was that Ida Drougge, in addition to this, came up with a number of anecdotes and misleading descriptions of both the past and the present. She took liberties with these things that cannot be taken. She began to talk about Botkyrka and the Socialdemokrater in a way that does not belong in the discussion. One can react to that. And it then becomes naturally interesting to look at what the Moderaterna think and do otherwise, that is, in issues where we—unlike in this report—have not been in agreement.
If one does that, it might perhaps seem a bit more understandable that Ida Drougge resorts to these expressions and this tone, because when it comes to other areas where there is also an upsetting leakage of welfare funds, we can state that the Moderaterna stand on other places, historically and now. There, they are not at all particularly eager to establish any agencies or take other measures that we know could contribute to strengthening the rule of law and the security around our payments.
Ida Drougge (M)
Mr. Speaker! I began to smile earlier when the member spoke. It was not exactly the intention but a completely honest reaction because I did not mention Botkyrka at all. I said nothing about Botkyrka in my speech. Nor did I say anything about Södertälje being the municipality that has the most extensive problems with infiltration in its operations.
However, I would now like to point out that the Delegation for Correct Payments had an international comparison conducted regarding work to stop fraud in connection with benefit payments as well as tax crimes. In this international comparison, it could be observed that Sweden was praised and pointed out as a world leader in the work to stop tax fraud and tax evasion, but that Sweden was at the bottom regarding just benefit fraud. This stands in stark contrast, Mr. Speaker, to what the member presented.
Tax money should be used for what it is intended to be used for. We shall use tax money so effectively that we do not take out more than absolutely necessary, because money has a value and contributes to Sweden's prosperity and development also in people's own pockets. This is my full conviction. I am not sure that Ali Esbati agrees with that, and he does not have to either. I can, however, at least until the summer, be pleased that we finally have a government that does.
Ali Esbati (V)
Mr. Speaker! It was not I who requested a reply to Ida Drougge, but what I mentioned in my speech was what several from her side of the bench took up in their speeches.
It is very interesting to note the somewhat desperate situation prevailing on that side. One uses a committee report where we in the chamber are completely in agreement on the establishment of the authority, and also agree that there is a problem with fraud and incorrect payments as well as that it is important to act against this, to give some kind of peppy speeches to each other regarding various social problems that one thinks one sees. I note that this was a bit strange and that it prompted me to make my contribution.
When I had now had this done, I noted something very interesting, namely that Ida Drougge said that tax money should go to what it is intended for. This happens to be almost verbatim a quote from a platform that we in the previous red-green cooperation had when we were trying to ensure that we limited the leakage of profit funds from welfare activities. What happened with that we know: the Sverigedemokraterna joined with the then Alliance parties to stop this and ensure that money does not always go to what it is intended for.
I note that this conflict lives on in Swedish politics. We will likely return to it many times - also after this summer.
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.