The two lines of our article, where we suggest that market rents are introduced quickly and fairly for all regulated rental units mainly refers to the distributional consequences.

the Process is an excellent illustration of the hyresregleringens harmful effects. It has made the perspective of private economics profitable to convert rental apartments to condominiums.

Glant should use their statistics to show that rent control is the main threat to the tenancy as the form of housing. And thus accede to our position that the tenancy must be saved by a quick and complete deregulation.

Glant takes up only 6 per cent of rental properties have in Stockholm is owned by the municipal utilities. We want to broaden the horizon and look at the whole country. Then it is significantly higher figures for the municipal ownership. And this applies to our argument that any rent increases at the introduction of market rents, to a large extent ends up as a growing rental revenues of the municipal enterprises.

We point out that the tenants should be given a reasonable period of time to be able to adapt to market rents – in our article, we recommend six years. Glant mean that it is astounding that we can then write: ”the shorter The period, the faster cease of the housing crisis”. Why is this astounding? Obviously, the disappearance of the queue with market rents. The point of free rentals is that there is no need to wait for 10-20 years in an apartment.

the Stockholm Housing service AB, the municipal corporations where the Glant is active as a member of the board, administers the waiting list. The company charges a fee of 200 sek per year from the more than 600,000 are registered to the queue. On average, they stand there in 10 years. In 2017 took the Housing service AB in the whole of the 97 million from the queuing. If market rents are introduced, as we suggest, the cessation of the housing crisis and thus also the housing queue. This would be a socio-economic gain of the Stockholm Housing service AB then was able to shrink its operations.

He disputes our interpretation of the Fiscal policy council’s interim report in 2017. But according to this, the largest rent increases hit the wealthy holders of leaseholds in Stockholm city centre in the event of deregulation. In some cases it may be hyressänkningar in the suburbs. Tegle out that the rents according to the Fiscal council does not generally will be reduced in the Stockholm suburb if market rents are introduced.

Let us respond with look at the pattern for the whole of Sweden. The fiscal policy council’s study applies only to Stockholm. The conclusions of the report have also been modified by the authors in a later article in the Economic journal (no. 8 in 2017) It gives more support to our argument that liberalisation has a favourable impact on the distribution.

Municipalities with ”uthyrningssvårigheter”, as the term in statistics SWEDEN’s statistics is subject, during the period 1998-2006 torn over 20,000 modern apartments to keep up the rents. These were built with government subsidies and has since been demolished by state grants.

Sweden outside the capital are also covered by rent control. The public municipal housing companies in many locations out of the country has monopoly power. High regulated rents have therefore retained even when the rental apartments remained empty.

If the market prevailed, would the rents have been lowered to fill the vacant apartments. But then they would municipal the monopoly companies have been forced to a general rent reduction with financial losses as a result. Instead, the municipalities with ”uthyrningssvårigheter”, as the term in statistics SWEDEN’s statistics is subject, during the period 1998-2006 torn over 20,000 modern apartments to keep up the rents. These were built with government subsidies and has since been demolished by state grants. Rivningspolitiken represents a pure capital destruction for Swedish society – an illustration of one of the hyresregleringens many destructive effects.

Tegle concludes his reply with the following: ”To introduce market rents for all, would lead to unreasonable adverse effects”. We have a completely different view. First, we propose a method where the tenants are paid by the property owners over a period of time in order to make deregulation socially acceptable. Ago, vulnerable tenants receive support from housing benefit. In addition, a deregulation in many respects a positive effect on income distribution. It is rent control that has unreasonable adverse effects.

Tegle concern, not a word to a total elimination of the rent regulation means greater prosperity for the outsiders who lack their own housing. A million people stand in the queue for housing in the three metropolitan areas. They would avoid long-term queuing if market rents were introduced for the entire stock of rental units. The national housing board has for the big cities estimated an annual value of this capitalised gets to hundreds and hundreds of billion ( ”the Housing crisis and hyressättningssystemet,” nov. 2013).

Our proposal is completely in line with what the International Monetary fund (IMF) has recommended in its annual assessment of the Swedish economy. It is time to learn from foreign experts who have experience of living in the countries with market rents.