Sweden’s Proposed Overhaul of Anti-Corruption Legislation: Key Takeaways from the Swedish Government’s Official Report (SOU 2025:87)

Over the years, Sweden has faced criticism for its limited prosecution of corruption offences, particularly in the context of international business. In July 2025, the government published the report ‘Criminal law measures against corruption and misconduct in office’ (SOU 2025:87), which sets out proposals for a comprehensive modernisation of Sweden’s anti-corruption legislation. The report was developed by a group of experts who, in response to the criticism, were tasked with strengthening the capacity to investigate and prosecute corruption offences, especially those with cross-border elements, and ensuring Swedish law aligns with international obligations. The main proposals in the report include consolidating corruption offences into a new statute, introducing stricter penalties, expanding criminal liability, and clarifying key legal concepts. Below, Setterwalls’ Compliance & Investigations group highlights some of the most significant proposals.

Introduction

The proposed reforms largely maintain the core principles of Swedish anti-corruption law but clarify several previously ambiguous aspects of its scope. In addition, the proposal recommends abolishing the requirement of dual criminality in certain cases, thereby enhancing Sweden’s ability to address corruption in international business transactions.

A central change concerns the expansion of corporate liability and fines for corruption offences committed by employees or representatives. Swedish criminal law is traditionally based on individual liability, meaning only natural persons can be convicted of crimes. Corporate liability is instead addressed through the system of corporate fines, which requires that an individual has committed an offence. These fines are not considered criminal penalties in the strict sense, but rather a so-called special legal consequence of an individual’s criminal offence.

Negligent Financing of Corruption Offences

Since 2012, Swedish law has included the offence of ‘reckless financing of bribery’ (Sw. vårdslös finansiering av mutbrott). However, this provision has never resulted in a prosecution, largely due to the evidentiary challenges of proving that specific financing led to a bribery offence, particularly in cases involving Swedish companies transferring funds to foreign intermediaries. The proposal is to replace this offence with the offence of ‘negligent financing of corruption offences’ (Sw. oaktsam finansiering av korruptionsbrott). While the terminology of both offences is similar, the new offence represents a significant broadening of criminal liability, as well as improved prospects for enforcement.

Under the proposed law, it will no longer be necessary to prove that a bribery offence was actually committed by someone representing the company. Instead, liability will arise if there was a significant risk that the assets provided would be used for bribery or trading in influence (Sw. handel med inflytande), provided that adequate control measures were not identified and implemented. The threshold is whether there were ‘reasonable grounds to believe’ that the assets could be used for such offences.

This shift in focus, from proving that bribery occurred to assessing whether the company took sufficient preventive measures, means that liability may arise even in the absence of a specific transaction or decision by an identifiable individual. The decisive factor is whether the company failed in its risk management and internal controls regarding transfers of funds or other assets in situations involving corruption risks. This approach is intended to facilitate the levying of corporate fines. In summary, the new offence means that greater responsibility will be placed on companies to work proactively to prevent corruption, e.g., by implementing robust anti-corruption compliance programmes.

Further, the proposal raises important questions for companies’ anti-corruption strategies and risk management. For example, the concept of providing financing is to be interpreted broadly, potentially encompassing intra-group financing arrangements and budget allocations by parent companies to subsidiaries. This raises practical questions about the extent to which ordinary business activities may fall within the scope of the new offence, the sufficiency of internal controls, and the allocation of liability between parent companies and subsidiaries.

Regardless of how the details of the proposal are to be interpreted, it is clear that the proposed reforms will impose more stringent requirements on companies to prevent corruption and to ensure effective oversight and division of responsibilities within corporate groups and in relation to third parties.

Abolition of the Dual Criminality Requirement

Currently, Swedish law requires that an act must be criminalised both in Sweden and in the country where it was committed (the principle of dual criminality) for prosecution of corruption offences committed abroad. The proposal would abolish this requirement for certain corruption offences, enabling Swedish authorities to prosecute companies and individuals in Sweden even if the conduct is not punishable in the jurisdiction where it occurred.

Expanded Criminalisation of Abuse of Public Office and Trading in Influence

Previously, criminal liability for abuse of public office was limited to acts performed in the exercise of public authority (Sw. myndighetsutövning), within the framework of the offence of misconduct of office. Now, a broader criminalisation is proposed, which covers improper acts committed in public service or assignments outside the exercise of public authority, such as in public procurement or the management of public funds. Elected officials are also brought within the scope of liability. For liability to arise, there must be intent to obtain an undue advantage for oneself or another, or to unfairly disadvantage another. The penalty framework is also being tightened, with more severe sanctions for serious offences.

The offence of trading in influence is also expanded. Previously, liability was limited to improper influence in the exercise of public authority and public procurement. The new proposal covers all undue influence over decisions or actions taken in the exercise of public office or public duties, including political decision-making. The key criterion is that the influence is ‘undue’, ensuring that only improper conduct is criminalised, while legitimate lobbying and advocacy remain permissible.

Next Steps

The report is currently subject to consultation until 7 November 2025. Following this consultation phase, the Swedish Government will prepare a draft bill for the Swedish Parliament’s subsequent consideration and approval. The new law is proposed to enter into force on 1 January 2027.

Setterwalls is closely monitoring developments in this area. Please contact us with any questions regarding the proposals or other anti-corruption matters.

This content is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice on which to base decisions in specific cases.