A Swedish Lesson
To Brits, Sweden with its
tightly regulated social welfare state is often a byword for socialism. But in
the last two decades the country has been transformed. today it offers a
flexible and dynamic European model with ever falling public expenditure, lower
taxes, economic growth and budget surpluses.
After many years of absence from the Swedish debate, I attended a
conference on the Swedish economy in the southern city of Malmö in May,
organized by Swedbank. The 180 speakers represented the full range of Swedish
views, which have moved amazingly far to the free-market right, not least
social democrats and trade union leaders. Key values are competition, openness
and efficiency, while social and environmental values remain. The idea is not
to abolish social welfare but to make it more efficient through competition
among private providers. A new consensus has emerged on having a social welfare
society rather than a social welfare state.
The changes have been dramatic. While Sweden’s public expenditure has
fallen by one-fifth of gross domestic product since 1993, between 2000 and 2009
Britain’s public expenditure skyrocketed by 15 per cent. This has brought
Swedish and British public spending to a similar level, but Sweden’s is still
steadily falling. Swedish taxes have been cut and her markets have opened up.
The Social Democratic Party was in power from 1932 until 1976, and again from
1994 until 2006, but Sweden was actually quite a liberal market economy until
1968. After a century of superior growth, its GDP per capita was the third
highest in the world.
But in 1968 left-wing madness took over. Our economic success had been too
great, making the government take high economic growth as a given, and the
left-wing wind that blew through the world in the late 1960s was particularly
strong in Sweden. But the decisive reason was the election of the extreme
socialist Olof Palme as prime minister in 1969. He dominated Swedish politics
until he was murdered on the street in Stockholm in 1986. His murder remains
unsolved, but it became a turning point for Swedish politics.Palme ruled with
great force. From 1970 until 1989, he raised taxes, including wealth tax, to
more than 100 per cent of income for the wealthy, while social security
exploded. Palme undermined the rule of law through retroactive legislation and
arbitrary state intervention. A major scheme for gradual nationalisation of
Swedish corporations through a punitive tax on their profits, using the money
to buy their shares, was adopted.
Arguably, Sweden is the only old nation that has never gone through a
revolution, and the people stayed obedient and peaceful in the face of this
onslaught. Private initiative was the victim. Since everybody was paid full
wages when taking sick leave, Swedes recorded more sick days than any other
nation. The truly wealthy emigrated en masse whereas others
worked less. Two decades of low growth ensued, and by 1990 GDP per capita had
fallen to 18th in the world. Swedes started feeling poor during their holidays
abroad. As elsewhere, Keynesian policies failed, and the country entered a
cycle of rising inflation, devaluation and unemployment. In 1990, crisis hit.
The country suffered a severe real-estate and bank crash that reduced GDP by 6
per cent in 1991-93. Prime real estate prices collapsed by 50 per cent in 1990.
In 1992, like Britain, Sweden was forced into an uncontrolled devaluation of
its currency. Unemployment surged and so did public expenditure that peaked at
71 per cent of GDP in 1993, when the budget deficit reached 11 per cent of GDP.
Finally, in September 1991, the social democrats lost an election and a
real non-socialist government under Carl Bildt came into office from 1991 to
1994. Although it was a four-party minority government, it took many radical
decisions and broke the trend. It turned the country around. Sweden had been
influenced by the free market ideology of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher
in the 1980s. In particular Timbro, a free-market think tank financed by the
Swedish Employers’ Confederation (SAF), caused a huge shift in political
thinking. Right-wing social democrats, who controlled the public finances,
systematically deregulated all the most complicated financial markets that
left-wingers did not understand.
Swedish reforms have been many, systematic, and comprehensive. The
immediate concern was the budget deficit. In the 1990s, Sweden’s budget deficit
was 13 per cent of GDP, with public expenditure cuts of 8 per cent of GDP and
tax hikes of 5 per cent of GDP. Sweden’s public debt was gradually reduced from
73 per cent of GDP in 1996 to 38 per cent of GDP in 2011. The government
trimmed all kinds of social security payments to reasonable levels. Sickness
leave has fallen by half since employees are no longer paid from the first day
or in full. Today, Sweden has regular budget surpluses, although tax revenues
have been reduced by 9 per cent of GDP from 1994 until 2011. Sweden’s main
scourge was tax. In 1990, the social democratic government actually cut
sky-high marginal income tax from 90 per cent to 50 per cent. The current
government has decreased taxes every year and abolished the wealth tax.
Inheritance tax and gift tax are also gone. A corporate profit tax of 26 per
cent may seem reasonable, but tax competition is fierce in this part of Europe,
as most East European countries have slashed corporate taxes to 15-19 per cent.
Business wants to reduce the corporate profit tax to 20 per cent.
One of the greatest reliefs is the simplification of tax administration.
Since the tax reforms of 1990 abolished almost all deductions, while cutting
rates, tax declarations have become extremely simple. Ninety per cent of
taxpayers simply confirm with a phone message that the declaration
automatically prepared by the tax authorities for them is correct. Pensions
have been subject to a major reform, giving everybody a pension in accordance
with their contributions plus a minimum pension for all. As a consequence, the
Swedish pension system is actuarially correct without any pay-as-you-go system
or implicit pension debt. It is also transparent so that all can see how large
a retirement capital they have saved, and to a considerable extent they can
choose when and how to invest it and access it.
The Swedish school system, Palme’s original bailiwick, was badly ravaged by
left-wing reforms of the 1960s and 1970s. Today, all pupils are entitled to
school vouchers of equal value for each child of a certain age. Their parents
can allocate this school voucher to any school the child is qualified to enter.
As a result, while in the 1970s Sweden had only four private schools, one-fifth
of Swedish secondary schools are now private, some for profit, others
cooperatives or non-profit foundations. Yet, in international school
comparisons, Sweden lags behind Finland that never carried out any foolish
left-wing reforms.
In 1995, Sweden joined the European Union in order to safeguard the rule of
law. In the bad old days, the Social Democratic Party regularly appointed its
partisan top civil servants as supreme court judges. Being within the
jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice means that the prospects of
winning against the Swedish government have improved greatly.After the devaluation
of 1992, Sweden adopted a floating exchange rate and inflation targeting. The
Riksbank used to be little more than a subdepartment of the ministry of
finance, but now it is independent. Today Sweden has persistently one of the
lowest inflation rates in Europe. In 2003, a referendum dismissed euro
adoption.
One of the first decisions of the Bildt government was to abolish the
wage-earners’ funds (sharing company profits with employees) and stop all
nationalisation. By and large, Sweden has followed Margaret Thatcher’s policy
of privatisation, privatising piecemeal when market conditions are conducive.
A tedious but important task is deregulation. Swedish governments have
quietly deregulated one market after another, contributing to greater economic
dynamism.The annual centralised wage bargaining between the Trade Union
Confederation (LO) and SAF was the pride of the old Swedish model. But in the
1970s it led to inflation and strikes, and today this system is long gone. Wage
bargaining is still collective, but it is becoming increasingly decentralised.
Wage inflation is no longer a concern and strikes are extremely rare. The
employers have won, but real wages are rising with productivity. As everywhere,
trade unions are losing members, money, and power. The Trade Union
Confederation has adjusted, its chair declaring recently: ‘We want flexibility
on the labour market.’
As the Thatcher revolution exemplified, real ideological victory is when
your opponents steal your clothes. In 1994, the social democrats under Göran
Persson returned to power and stayed until 2006. Although they complained about
all the cuts the non-socialist government had undertaken and carried out few
reforms, they did not revoke the reforms but completed fiscal tightening. It was
actually Persson who abolished the inheritance and gift taxes.
In 2006, four non-socialist parties formed a coalition government with
Fredrik Reinfeldt as prime minister. Finance Minister Anders Borg, with his
trademark pony-tail and earring, has led further reforms. After having taken
Sweden successfully through the global financial crisis, this government was
re-elected in 2010, and the Financial Times named Borg Europe’s
best finance minister last year.
Keynesianism remains disliked in Sweden. Before the global financial crisis
Sweden had a budget surplus on average of 2.5 per cent of GDP in the years 2004‑7.
After a minimal budget deficit in 2009, it has once again a budget surplus.
Sweden remains, like Germany and Finland, highly dependent on exports, and its
GDP fell by 5 per cent in 2009, but it rebounded by 6 per cent in 2010 and 4
per cent in 2011, and the current account surplus is substantial. Sweden’s
credit default swaps are lower than Germany’s. The only concerns are the euro
crisis depressing demand, and unemployment, which hovers around 7.5 per cent.
Swedes shake their heads when they see the economic policy in euro crisis
countries. They take their cue from their own crisis in the early 1990s and
call for far more expenditure cuts and structural reforms. Finance Minister
Borg argues against more expansionary policy in Sweden in case the euro crisis
should lead to a real meltdown.The right-wing drift of the much reduced Social
Democratic Party continues, making it reminiscent of New Labour. Its brand-new
leader, Stefan Löfven, came to prominence during the global financial crisis,
when he and the metalworkers’ union agreed to major wage cuts to safeguard
their real incomes in the long run. The social democrats have not only joined
the free market consensus, but seem to attack the current government from the
right, demanding a better business environment. Gone are demands for the
restoration of social benefits. Opinion polls have rewarded the social
democrats for their right turn with sharply improved ratings. The left-wing
intellectuals are also gone. The old socialist think tanks have closed down.
The Centre for Labour Market Studies was a state institution, and the
non-socialist government closed it, since it did not generate research but
left-wing propaganda. The Trade Union Organisation had a sophisticated research
institute, which it eliminated for not being sufficiently political. The trade
union economists, who dominated the Swedish economic debate in the 1970s and
1980s, have been replaced by bank economists. The free-market right has won the
debate and maintains substantial think tanks in Stockholm. Their main problem
is a lack of resistance.
Sweden is not alone. Developments are similar in the other Scandinavian
countries, the Baltic countries, and Poland. The Swedish about turn is the most
dramatic. While its direction is clear, much remains to be done. The Baltic
states look very attractive with public expenditures around 35 per cent of GDP
and low, flat income taxes. They are a source of inspiration for their
Scandinavian neighbours. In the last two years, five incumbent EU governments
have been re-elected, namely centre-right governments in Sweden, Finland,
Estonia, Latvia and Poland, showing that the new North European conservatism
enjoys popular support.
No comments:
Post a Comment