Debate: Report Challenges SD's Immigration Cost Claims

The outcome of the Tidö parties' major political project to finally calculate the 'costs of immigration' has backfired significantly, write Daniel Suhonen and Tony Johansson from Katalys.

Final Reply. The National Institute of Economic Research's (KI) report on immigration is a disaster for the Sweden Democrats' (SD) agenda. This is why the party is now so subdued in its rhetoric about the alleged costs of immigration.

SD's economic policy spokesperson, Oscar Sjöstedt, tries to keep the flame alive despite the cold shower that KI's report must have been. He claims in a reply to our article that immigration is a cost and that KI's report confirms SD's policy.

We can state that what KI calculates are not costs. It is redistribution within the framework of the tax and welfare systems, primarily caused by the fact that the group of refugee immigrants has lower incomes than the rest of the population. This results in lower tax payments and a negative sign in this type of calculation.

SD calls this, without basis, 'the costs of immigration.'

Absurd

But does this not mean a transfer of money from 'Swedes' to 'immigrants'—and thus a cost that would disappear without immigration? No, it does not. Many immigrants end up in low-paid jobs. But with SD's logic, therefore, assistant nurses and care aides—regardless of whether they are born in Sweden or abroad—are a cost to Sweden.

This is, of course, absurd. They perform important work, which would have needed to be done even without immigrants. Likely, someone born in Sweden would have performed the work instead. The tax payments would have been the same. Not a single krona would have been saved.

According to KI's calculation, the group of foreign-born is now a positive item and the native-born a negative item in these calculations. As the native-born population ages, this relationship is likely to persist and strengthen. This means that if SD wants to continue claiming that refugee immigration is a cost, they must now also start claiming that native-born are a cost. Not only is this wrong, but we assume it fits poorly with SD's agenda.

The outcome of the Tidö parties' major political project to finally calculate the 'costs of immigration' has backfired significantly. Instead of supporting a strict migration policy, the discussion has led to more people realizing that Sweden's economy and development are harmed by SD's policies.

By Daniel Suhonen

Head of the trade union think tank Katalys

Tony Johansson

Ph.D. in Economic History and author of 'The Profit of Immigration' (Katalys 2025)