Proposed stricter "Good Conduct" Requirements to Impact Swedish Residence and Work Permits

Background

The Swedish government has proposed new legislation, expected to take effect on 13 July 2026, that would allow for the denial or revocation of residence permits based on a "good conduct" or "honest living" (Swe: Vandel) requirement. Historically, the ability to deny or revoke a residence permit based on an individual's conduct has been closely tied to formal criminal convictions and specific threats to national security. However, the current legal framework has been criticized for being too narrow and failing to address behaviors that, while not always criminal, are deemed harmful to society. This proposal expands grounds for denial of a residence permit to include behaviors like benefit fraud, unpaid debts, or associations with criminal networks, and introduces continuous assessments of conduct during permit renewals. The proposal has been referred to the Council on Legislation (Swe: Lagrådsremiss).

Current legal framework 

The Swedish immigration legislation already contains provisions on the possibility of taking personal circumstances into account when assessing whether an individual carrying a residence permit should have the right to reside in Sweden. The notion of "deficient conduct" (Swe: Bristande vandel) is not defined in statute but has been elaborated in preparatory works and case law. It covers both recorded criminality and, in some instances, clearly established non-criminal misconduct. The assessment is forward-looking: it is the applicant's expected future conduct that is decisive, although this must be inferred from his or her past behaviour.

First, Chapter 5, Section 17 of the Aliens Act requires that, when examining applications for residence permits, particular account shall be taken of whether the applicant has committed criminal offences or offences in combination with other misconduct. Second, Chapter 5, Section 7 sets out a stricter standard for permanent residence permits, allowing such permits only where, having regard to the applicants' expected future conduct, there is no doubt that permanent residence should be granted. The preparatory works clarify that not only serious crime, but also less serious criminality combined with serious misconduct may speak against a permanent residence permit; however, "trivial offences" are not, as such, sufficient to justify a refusal.

The proposed reform towards stricter conduct requirements

The government’s bill proposes a further tightening and clarification of the "good conduct" requirement (Swe: Vandelskravet) in Swedish migration law. The reform aims to elevate the importance of conduct considerations and to reduce discretionary uncertainty. 

A key element of this proposal is the holistic assessment, where criminal convictions and other types of misconduct (such as welfare abuse or debt) are weighed together. It is however stipualted that the assessment must balance the severity of the misconduct against the individual's length of stay and ties to Sweden: the weaker an applicant’s ties to Sweden, the lower the threshold for denying a permit based on misconduct. Conversely, for those with strong ties or family connections only exceptionally grave or documented misconduct justifies a denial. Ultimately, the authority must perform a forward-looking evaluation, weighing the potential societal risks of the individual’s presence against their personal grounds for residency and the best interests of any children involved.

Deficient conduct shall be taken into account when assessing whether a residence permit can be granted

The government's position is that a specific definition of the concept of good conduct should not be introduced to maintain a flexible situation-based framework. The framework focuses on honest and orderly conduct beyond criminal convictions. Key factors include the impact on others, compliance with regulations, and the individual's personal circumstances.

A residence permit may be denied if an applicant fails to meet the "good conduct" requirements, even in cases where no criminal conviction exists. This assessment focuses on whether the individual leads an honest life or engages in conduct that society actively opposes, such as welfare abuse, extensive debt, or threats to public order. While minor or trivial incidents are excluded, repeated or serious misconduct such as a pattern of dishonest livelihood or posing a danger to others can lead to a rejection.

The assessment may primarily include:

• Criminality and Lack of Compliance: Beyond actual crimes, it covers failures to follow laws, court rulings, or administrative decisions (e.g., non-compliance leading to fines or penalties)
• Dishonest Livelihood and Welfare Abuse: This includes the intentional misuse of the welfare system and cases where benefits have been incorrectly claimed.
• Debts and Financial Irregularities: Unpaid debts and financial misconduct that indicate a lack of personal responsibility.
• Threats to Public Order and Security: Actions that jeopardize public safety or involve involvement in environments that undermine the democratic order.
• Criminalized Statements: Certain types of expressions or statements that are prohibited by law (e.g., hate speech or incitement).

The government emphasizes that the assessment must be predictable, documented and legally certain. Further, it will be possible to revoke a permit even if incorrect information or concealed circumstances were provided by someone other than the applicant (e.g., an employer or representative) in conjunction with an application.

As for permanent residence permits specifically, the Swedish government intends to update the regulations by aligning them with the new, stricter "good conduct" standards to include non-criminal misconduct, such as a lack of an honest livelihood or serious public disturbance.

Strengthened powers to refuse entry and deport third country nationals

The Swedish government proposes expanding the grounds for refusing entry (Swe: Avvisning) to non-EEA citizens and their family members. Under the new regulations, authorities will be able to refuse entry if it can be reasonably assumed that the individual will fail to meet "good conduct" requirements after entering Sweden.

A key focus of this assessment is the risk of future criminality. Specifically, an individual may be refused entry if they can be expected to commit crimes based on their past record, such as having previously received a sentence more severe than a fine or having repeatedly been fined for criminal offenses.

Deloitte’s comments 

The proposed changes point towards a model in which deficient conduct (Swe: Bristande vandel) will have a more centralised role in the application process. The proposed changes are part of the Government's and the Sweden Democrats' continuous efforts to implement stricter Swedish immigration legislation.

Even though the background to the proposed changes may have support, concerns have been raised regarding potential legal uncertainty and predictability due to the broad definition of "good conduct". The government's ambition to make the requirements "clearer" while maintaining "flexibility over time" is at risk of creating a legal tension. For a regulation to be predictable the criteria must be exhaustive and specific. However, by explicitly stating that the list of circumstances is not exhaustive, the regulation grants authorities significant leeway leading to a risk of more arbitrary assessments. By including terms such as "dishonest livelihood," "welfare abuse," and "debts," the regulation introduces administrative discretion over behaviors that are not necessarily illegal but are in accordance with the government's standpoint deemed socially undesirable. This may lead to inconsistent rulings between different administrative courts until clear case law from the Migration Court of Appeal is established.

Further the provision allowing for the revocation of work permits due to deliberate misinformation by a third party (e.g., an employer) has also raised concerns about a consequence where the permit holder is penalized for actions outside their immediate control. It shifts the burden of a clear review onto the worker, who may lack the transparency or power to verify the employer's submissions to the Migration Agency.

It remains to be seen how this review will be done, and whether a requirement for the applicant to confirm, for example, their orderly conduct in the application, something that is not currently required, will be introduced.

Swedish immigration legislation is undergoing significant changes, and Deloitte is actively monitoring these developments to keep you informed. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us:

Martina Ogenhammar
Partner, Head of Immigration - Global Employer Services  
mogenhammar@deloitte.se
+46 70 080 21 60

Evelina Ohlsson
Assistant Manager - Global Employer Services
eohlsson@deloitte.se 
+46 70 080 35 20

Switchboard
seimmigration@deloitte.se
+46 75 246 26 001