A Swedish Green Party candidate running businesses in the welfare sector has become the focus of a wider debate over whether tax-funded care can coexist with private profits, after details emerged that her company paid annual dividends while operating a fleet of five vehicles including BMWs, a Jeep Wrangler and a Mercedes V-Class.
Swedish Green candidate's care firm paid dividends
The case matters because it goes to the heart of one of Sweden’s most contested election issues: who should capture the upside from publicly funded care. Social Democrats, the Left Party and the Greens all campaign against profits in welfare, arguing that tax money meant for care should stay in the service, not end up with owners. Yet several candidates from those same parties have stakes in companies that have distributed cash to shareholders, creating a political liability that extends beyond one business.
Servan Bozarslan, a Green Party local politician in Solna and candidate for both the municipal council and parliament, has for a decade chaired and run Inkludering AB, which provides supported housing, training apartments and care homes. The company said in its latest annual report that it had seen “continuous growth” in 2025 with “good results.” Over the past five years it has also paid annual dividends to owners, including Bozarslan, ranging from 187,000 kronor to 349,000 kronor.
That dividend record is hard to square with the party’s line that welfare surplus should be reinvested rather than distributed. Bozarslan told Expressen the company was “idea-driven,” and later said the payouts were compensation for relatively low pay and the responsibility she carried in the business. She also said she would not push a political line that would benefit her own company.
The tension is economically relevant because Sweden’s privately run welfare market depends on public reimbursement and has been politically vulnerable for years. Any tightening of rules around profit extraction could hit margins, valuations and future cash returns across care providers, especially smaller owner-operated firms where profits are closely tied to the founders’ income. For investors and owners in the sector, the issue is not only reputation but policy risk.
The company’s operations have not been without criticism. The Swedish Health and Social Care Inspectorate in the spring said Inkludering AB was not operating fully in line with its licence, citing unclear premises and shortcomings in staff background checks. Bozarslan said those issues had since been fixed.
A related company, Inkludering Resurs AB, has also paid out 6.7 million kronor in dividends over several years, according to annual reports, with part of the money flowing to a holding company partly owned by Bozarslan and part returning as intra-group contributions. Bozarslan reported annual earned income of 1.1 million kronor and 1.2 million kronor in recent years, on top of the dividends.
The vehicle line-up has added to the scrutiny. According to transport records, Inkludering AB has five vehicles, including two BMW X5s, a BMW M2, a Jeep Wrangler and a Mercedes V-Class. Bozarslan said the company uses both service cars and benefit cars, and declined to comment on the “character” of the vehicles.
The broader political risk is clear. If welfare profits remain a defining campaign issue, parties calling for stricter limits will face pressure to show consistency among their own candidates. If they do not, opponents will use cases like this to argue that the system’s critics are also participants in it. For care companies, the immediate business model may remain intact, but the debate raises the probability of tougher regulation, more disclosure and weaker tolerance for dividend extraction in taxpayer-funded services.
| Entity | Gains | Losses |
|---|---|---|
| Welfare owners | ▲Dividend income | ▼Political scrutiny |
| Tax-funded care users | ▲Continued service supply | ▼Less reinvestment |
| S, V and MP | ▲Campaign issue salience | ▼Credibility risk |
| Private care sector | ▲Status quo profitability | ▼Higher regulatory risk |

