Remittance of funds from production values, natural resources and real estate
Regionalizing property tax and returning value from power production
What's at stake: The decision affects how much economic benefit municipalities and regions with power production and industry get to keep locally. It concerns rural municipalities, residents near power installations, and local acceptance of expanded power production.
Case texts and AI reasoning are AI-translated from the Swedish originals; the Swedish text is authoritative.
What the vote decides
The question is whether a larger share of the economic value created by power production and industry should stay local through a regionalized property tax and new compensation models, or whether the issue should be handled within the existing municipal equalization system and ongoing inquiries.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee notes that questions of municipal economic conditions and value-sharing from power production are already being reviewed and prepared within government, and therefore sees no reason for parliament to call for a regionalized property tax at this time. The motions are rejected.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 10 (C)
The reservation (C) wants to regionalize property tax so that municipalities and regions producing electricity via wind and hydropower keep a larger share of the value, and to quickly introduce clearer compensation schemes for neighbors and municipalities, arguing that the current system disadvantages rural areas and undermines acceptance of expanded power production.
Summarised from the committee report. Party labels in the summary come from the report, not from the vote.
V–
S–
MP–
C–
L–
KD–
M–
SD–
YesNoAbstainAbsent
What do the votes mean here?
Yes The committee proposal: rejecting the motions (keeping things as they are).
No Backing the counter-proposal: reservation 10 by C.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
The plan's stance / Actual vote
AI
Vote
Confidence
Evidence
V
–
Abstain 0/0/19/3
S
–
Abstain 0/0/93/13
MP
–
Abstain 0/0/15/3
Cown reservation
–
No 0/21/0/3
L
–
Yes 14/0/0/2
KD
–
Yes 16/0/0/3
M
–
Yes 60/0/0/8
SD
–
Yes 60/0/0/11
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects the motions
2025/26:156 by Eric Palmqvist et al. (SD),
2025/26:654 by Peder Björk et al. (S),
2025/26:989 by Helena Lindahl (C),
2025/26:1117 by Anne-Li Sjölund (C),
2025/26:1132 by Martina Johansson (C),
2025/26:1890 by Viktor Wärnick (M),
2025/26:1944 by Lars Isacsson (S),
2025/26:2711 by Saila Quicklund (M),
2025/26:2797 by Nooshi Dadgostar et al. (V) demands 7 and 15,
2025/26:2835 by Anders Ådahl et al. (C) demand 9,
2025/26:2973 by Mathias Bengtsson (KD),
2025/26:3185 by Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist et al. (C) demands 4 and 5,
2025/26:3273 by Linus Lakso et al. (MP) demand 14,
2025/26:3418 by Katarina Luhr et al. (MP) demand 9,
2025/26:3422 by Katarina Luhr et al. (MP) demand 46,
2025/26:3596 by Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist et al. (C) demand 21,
2025/26:3614 by Lina Nordquist et al. (L) demands 1 and 2,
2025/26:3732 by Åsa Westlund et al. (S) demand 27 and
2025/26:3750 by Kjell-Arne Ottosson (KD).
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motionerna
2025/26:156 av Eric Palmqvist m.fl. (SD),
2025/26:654 av Peder Björk m.fl. (S),
2025/26:989 av Helena Lindahl (C),
2025/26:1117 av Anne-Li Sjölund (C),
2025/26:1132 av Martina Johansson (C),
2025/26:1890 av Viktor Wärnick (M),
2025/26:1944 av Lars Isacsson (S),
2025/26:2711 av Saila Quicklund (M),
2025/26:2797 av Nooshi Dadgostar m.fl. (V) yrkandena 7 och 15,
2025/26:2835 av Anders Ådahl m.fl. (C) yrkande 9,
2025/26:2973 av Mathias Bengtsson (KD),
2025/26:3185 av Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist m.fl. (C) yrkandena 4 och 5,
2025/26:3273 av Linus Lakso m.fl. (MP) yrkande 14,
2025/26:3418 av Katarina Luhr m.fl. (MP) yrkande 9,
2025/26:3422 av Katarina Luhr m.fl. (MP) yrkande 46,
2025/26:3596 av Elisabeth Thand Ringqvist m.fl. (C) yrkande 21,
2025/26:3614 av Lina Nordquist m.fl. (L) yrkandena 1 och 2,
2025/26:3732 av Åsa Westlund m.fl. (S) yrkande 27 och
2025/26:3750 av Kjell-Arne Ottosson (KD).
Riksdag decision: The Riksdag said no to 70 proposals on regional development policy in motions from the general motion period in 2025.
The proposals concern efforts for regional development and growth, commercial and public services, remittance of funds from production values, natural resources and real estate, location of state authorities, and efforts for certain regions.
The Riksdag refers, among other things, to ongoing efforts and investigation.
Counter-proposals
The counter-proposal wants to introduce a mandatory impact assessment from a rural perspective in the legislative process and establish a rural commission to review proposals from that perspective. (C) — Reservation 10
Motion 2025/26:1246 — Statlig närvaro i hela landet av Anna-Caren Sätherberg och Lena Bäckelin (båda S)
Motion 2025/26:1269 — Statlig närvaro i hela landet av Niklas Karlsson m.fl. (S)
Motion 2025/26:1276 — Reformer för ökad tillväxt i Stockholmsregionen av Josefin Malmqvist m.fl. (M)
Motion 2025/26:1382 — Västmotion om energi- och näringspolitik av Marcus Andersson m.fl. (S)
Motion 2025/26:156 — Utredning om förutsättningarna för en regionalisering av fastighetsskatten för elproduktions- och industrifastigheter av Eric Palmqvist m.fl. (SD)