Here you will find all our publications and reports, including our monthly report on Sweden's central government debt.

Are you looking for a particular report or publication within a certain subject area? You can filter your search results under “Areas of operation”.

Report Minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) – Compliance Q4 2022

Publication 3 March 2023 Financial stability, Report – MREL

In this report, the Debt Office shows how well the systemically important institutions met the set MREL requirements as of the end of the fourth quarter 2022.

Report: Minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) – Compliance Q4 2022

Compliance with the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities - Q4 2022

Financial and Risk Policy 2023

Publication 17 February 2023 Report – Other

The policy compiles rules, frameworks, and target levels when relevant for managing risks that arise as part of the Debt Office’s operations. The policy also specifies certain principles for the conduct of operations. The annual review, reconsideration and adoption of this policy establish a process that ensures the policy remains up to date and relevant.  

Financial and Risk Policy 2023

Central Government Guarantees and Lending - A Risk Analysis 2022

Publication 15 March 2022 Guarantees and Lending, Guarantees and Lending – a Risk Analysis

Debt Office Commentary: Public-private partnership risks being expensive and uncertain for the central government

News 23 December 2021 Publication, Debt Office Commentary

In a PPP contracting arrangement, a private enterprise is appointed – to carry out a state infrastructure project, for instance – which is then repaid by the central government. In Sweden, it has not been particularly common. One of few examples is the New Karolinska Hospital. Abroad, PPP has been more commonplace, for instance in the UK, the Netherlands and France.

 PPP advocators argue that the incentive structure in a PPP generates socioeconomic efficiencies. In a PPP, project payment is also deferred, and there is thus no near-term burden on the central government budget, which might appeal to decision-makers.  

However, potential benefits are unsure and are outweighed by the drawbacks, according to the Debt Office economists in their commentary. Transparency surrounding decisions will be impaired, and financing will be more expensive because private-sector entities have a lower credit rating than the central government. A number of conducted empirical studies also appear to support this conclusion. In the UK for example, PPP is no longer used.

The authors round off their commentary by advising the central government against using PPP. 

Read the commentary in full here