Other Matters Concerning Tax on Chemicals, etc.

The plan states that taxes as policy instruments need to be designed wisely to have real effect, and that policy should be based on proposals that prove effective when implemented. Environmental goals must be monitored through rigorous legislation and practical work. A review of the chemical tax's design to ensure intended environmental effects is in line with this, but the plan does not address the tax and a review could also lead to weakening.

• policy instruments must have real effectdecisive»tomställningen. De behöver utformas klokt för att få verklig effekt och« (party programme ↗)“situation. They need to be designed wisely to have real effect and”
• evidence-based policy»förslag som visar sig effektiva och rättvisa den dag de genomförs.« (party programme ↗)“proposals that prove effective and fair when implemented.”
• ambitious environmental goals»miljömål som följs upp med skarp lagstiftning och praktiskt arbete.« (party programme ↗)“environmental goals that are monitored with rigorous legislation and practical work.”
• circular material use»Återanvändning och återvinning av material behöver öka.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Reuse and recycling of materials need to increase.”

The plan's goal is a toxin-free environment and that the principle that the polluter pays is applied fully; a policy tool that according to evaluation neither gives intended environmental effects nor is cost-effective does not meet that goal. A review of the tax's design to ensure desired effects is therefore in line with the plan. However, the plan does not address the chemical tax, so the position is derived.

• toxin-free environmentdecisive»Giftfri miljö med ren luft och rent vatten i hela Sverige.« (party programme ↗)“Toxin-free environment with clean air and clean water throughout Sweden.”
• the polluter pays»Principen om att förorenaren betalar tillämpas fullt ut.« (party programme ↗)“The principle that the polluter pays is applied fully.”
• circular economy»Omställning till cirkulär ekonomi, för bättre användning av befintliga resurser.« (party programme ↗)“Transition to circular economy, for better use of existing resources.”

The plan requires that toxic substances be phased out immediately and that legislation against harmful substances be sharpened, with the precautionary principle as starting point. A policy instrument that by evaluation neither delivers the intended environmental effect nor is cost-effective does not serve that goal, and a review of the tax's design to secure desired effects is therefore in the plan's direction. The plan does not comment on the chemical tax as such, so the conclusion is uncertain.

• precautionary principle for chemicalsdecisive»Vi vill att försiktighetsprincipen ska tillämpas i synen på kemikalier, då det kan ta lång tid innan effekterna av en kemikalie märks i naturen eller på hälsan.« (party programme ↗)“We want the precautionary principle to be applied in our approach to chemicals, since it can take a long time before the effects of a chemical are noticed in nature or on health.”
• rapid phasing out of toxins»fasa ut giftiga ämnen omgående, speciellt från produkter för barn.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“phase out toxic substances immediately, especially from products for children.”
• bans ahead of ineffective policy instruments»Lagstiftningen mot spridning av föroreningar i miljön måste skärpas. Fler ämnen som riskerar att skada människor och natur ska förbjudas.« (party programme ↗)“Legislation against spread of pollution in the environment must be sharpened. More substances that risk harming people and nature shall be prohibited.”

The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.

The plan requires leadership that prioritizes effective measures ahead of symbolic politics and states that the climate cannot wait for expensive and complicated regulations. A tax that according to evaluation has neither achieved intended environmental effects nor been cost-effective is just such a regulation that should be reviewed. Policy instruments should make it unprofitable to act as an environmental destroyer, not just cost money.

• effective measures ahead of symbolic politicsdecisive»Ett ledarskap som prioriterar effektiva åtgärder framför symbolpolitik eller passivitet.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Leadership that prioritizes effective measures ahead of symbolic politics or passivity.”
• no complicated regulations»Klimatet kan inte vänta på dyra och krångliga regelverk.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The climate cannot wait for expensive and complicated regulations.”
• policy instruments should work right»Det ska alltid vara lönsamt att vara miljövårdande och olönsamt att agera miljöförstörande.« (party programme ↗)“It should always be profitable to be environmentally responsible and unprofitable to act as an environmental destroyer.”
• reduced tax burden»Det totala skattetrycket måste ner nästa mandatperiod.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The total tax burden must come down next term.”

The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.

The plan measures environmental policy in actual effect and explicitly distances itself from measures that soothe the conscience instead of saving the environment. A tax that according to evaluation has neither produced the intended environmental effects nor been cost-effective shall therefore be reviewed. The plan defends the chemical tax as a tool against dangerous substances, but therefore its design must work.

• effective, not symbolic environmental policydecisive»Liberal miljöpolitik tar avstånd från symbolpolitik och åtgärder som dövar samveten i stället för att rädda miljön.« (party programme ↗)“Liberal environmental policy distances itself from symbolic politics and measures that soothe the conscience instead of saving the environment.”
• measure effect, not tax level»Och nu behövs en klimatpolitik som inte mäts i hur många skatter som höjs eller hur mycket den kostar skattebetalarna utan i hur mycket den på riktigt får ner utsläppen.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“And now we need a climate policy that is not measured by how many taxes are raised or how much it costs taxpayers, but by how much it actually reduces emissions.”
• chemical tax against dangerous substances»Kemikalieskatt bidrar till att få bort farliga kemikalier.« (party programme ↗)“Chemical tax contributes to removing dangerous chemicals.”
• the precautionary principle»Kemikalielagstiftningen ska utgå från försiktighetsprincipen.« (party programme ↗)“Chemical legislation shall be based on the precautionary principle.”

The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.

The plan says that economic instruments shall be used to create incentives to act in an environmentally friendly manner and that evaluation and cost tracking are important political tasks. A tax that according to evaluation has neither given environmental effect nor been cost-effective should therefore be reviewed, in line with that complex rules should be counteracted. The substitution principle argues for steering away from dangerous substances, but not for an ineffective instrument.

• monitoring of instrumentsdecisive»kostnadsuppföljning och kvalitetskontroll är därför viktiga politiska uppgifter« (party programme ↗)“cost tracking and quality control are therefore important political tasks”
• effective environmental instruments»Ekonomiska styrmedel och stöd ska användas för att skapa« (party programme ↗)“Economic instruments and support shall be used to create”
• counteract complex rules»Byråkrati och krångliga regler ska« (party programme ↗)“Bureaucracy and complex rules shall”
• the substitution principle»Substitutionsprincipen, som innebär att mindre farliga ämnen« (party programme ↗)“The substitution principle, which means that less dangerous substances”

The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.

The plan wants to stop the tax shock of 46 raised taxes that complicate and make daily life more expensive, and requires that science and facts shall be leading in environmental policy. A tax that in evaluation has delivered neither its intended environmental effects nor been cost-effective is precisely such a tax the plan wants to review. Reviewing the design of the chemicals tax thereby aligns with the plan's commitments to fewer complicated taxes and effective environmental policy.

• fewer complicated taxesdecisive»Under de senaste åtta åren har regeringen höjt 46 skatter, som krånglar till och fördyrar vardagen för både företagare och konsumenter.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Over the past eight years the government has raised 46 taxes, which complicate and make daily life more expensive for both business owners and consumers.”
• evidence-based environmental policyweak support»Vetenskap och fakta ska vara ledande i klimat- och miljöpolitiken.« (party programme ↗)“Science and facts shall be leading in climate and environment policy.”
• reduced red tape»Ta bort en tredjedel av företagens administrationskostnader och en tredjedel av regelkrånglet« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Remove a third of businesses' administration costs and a third of red tape”
• no to ineffective symbol politics»Klimatpolitiken får aldrig reduceras till dyrbar symbolpolitik eller snäv klimatnationalism.« (party programme ↗)“Climate policy must never be reduced to expensive symbol politics or narrow climate nationalism.”

flags: citat_svagt

The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.

The plan's environmental line is to seek the measures that deliver the most environment per krona and that policy shall be tuned to research and be based on facts. A tax that according to evaluation has delivered neither intended environmental effect nor been cost-effective shall therefore be reviewed. The plan also requires that existing rules are reviewed and that every public measure shows clear results.

• most environment per kronadecisive»Sträva efter miljöeffektivitet och hitta de åtgärder som ger mest miljö per krona« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Strive for environmental efficiency and find the measures that deliver the most environment per krona”
• evidence-based environmental policy»Miljöpolitiken måste alltid stämmas av mot nya rön i forskningen och baseras på fakta framför känslor.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Environmental policy must always be tuned to new findings in research and based on facts ahead of feelings.”
• review of regulations»Nya regler ska vara kostnadseffektiva och befintliga regler behöver ses över.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“New rules shall be cost-effective and existing rules need to be reviewed.”
• results requirements»Begära tydliga resultat för varje offentlig satsning« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Demand clear results for every public initiative”

The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.