Government Critical of Banks' Account Closures: “Being a Bank Comes with Obligations”

Private individuals and companies have increasingly had their accounts and BankID blocked as part of the banks’ anti-money laundering efforts, sometimes with very far-reaching consequences and without having done anything wrong. In an interview with Realtid, Financial Markets Minister Niklas Wykman (M) says the conflict is real: society must combat serious crime, but innocent customers should not be left for months without access to basic banking services.

Financial Markets Minister Niklas Wykman at the Ministry of Finance describes the situation as a difficult balancing act. The state and the banking sector are under pressure to stop money laundering, criminal networks, and financial crime, but at the same time, the measures cannot be so harsh that ordinary people and legitimate businesses are in practice excluded from society.

“This is a genuine conflict of interest,” Wykman tells Realtid, which has highlighted the issue in a series of articles.

He points out that the government prioritizes the fight against organized crime and that the current trend must be reversed. But he is also clear that the banks’ mission is not only about control and regulatory compliance, but also about maintaining effective service for customers.

Banks Must Take Responsibility for the Consequences

A central point in Wykman’s reasoning is that the societal role of banks also entails responsibility for the consequences when accounts are blocked or investigations drag on. He emphasizes to Realtid that it is not enough to refer to internal processes or regulatory requirements if, in practice, customers are left without access to their money and most basic services for a long time.

Running a bank comes with obligations, Wykman notes. This includes allocating resources for the task, such as ensuring there is adequate customer service and that cases affecting customers do not drag on unreasonably long.

At the same time, he makes it clear that he has no principled objections to the banks being profitable. The problem, according to him, arises if efficiency and profit take precedence over the customers’ chances of receiving reasonable help and quick handling.

Customers Also Have a Role

However, Wykman does not put all the responsibility on the banks. In the interview with Realtid, he emphasizes that customers themselves must help keep their relationship with the bank up to date, especially if their life situation changes or if larger or unusual transactions are to be made.

He says that customers should answer the bank’s questions when suspicions or uncertainties arise, and describes it not as the bank automatically assuming the customer is a criminal, but rather as a control which can also protect people from being exploited by others.

“As a customer, it’s important to answer the bank’s questions if there is suspicion of money laundering. It’s not about making the customer feel suspicious, but more like a health check. We have seen many cases where people are exploited as links by others and become both crime victims and tools.”

Unclear Rules Drive Tough Decisions

A recurring theme in Wykman’s reasoning, according to Realtid’s reporting, is that the problem does not primarily lie in the rules being too strict, but in the fact that they are often perceived as unclear. Banks that misjudge situations risk severe sanctions, which creates incentives to act very cautiously and sometimes intervene early and harshly.

He also believes that traditional compliance work is not sufficient on its own. Instead, he highlights the new financial intelligence center being established, where the Police Authority and the Swedish Tax Agency collaborate with banks to detect patterns and improve the accuracy of efforts against money laundering.

FI to Provide Clearer Guidance

Realtid has previously reported that the Financial Supervisory Authority (FI) has pointed out several times that banks need to be better at avoiding harm to customers when accounts are denied or closed. The agency has, among other things, argued that banks should more often try less interventionist measures before closing an account entirely.

Pixabay / Santeri Viinamäki, CC BY-SA 4.0 / CHG

Against this backdrop, Wykman tells Realtid that the government has tasked the Financial Supervisory Authority with producing clearer guidance on money laundering and customer management issues. The idea is to reduce uncertainty and make it easier for banks to act correctly from the very start. According to Realtid, the agency is expected to present concrete proposals in May.

The BankID Problem Reveals the State’s Responsibility

A particularly serious consequence previously highlighted by Realtid is that customers not only lose access to accounts, but also to BankID. This can make it difficult or impossible to read messages from the bank, use government services, manage bills, or access other important digital mail.

Wykman admits in the interview that the state itself bears responsibility for the fact that the reliance on bank-issued e-identification has become so widespread. He believes that Sweden should have established a government-issued e-ID a long time ago. Such a state solution is planned to be introduced on the first of December this year.

EU Rules May Further Increase the Pressure

The background to these developments is broader than individual bank decisions. Realtid has previously described how Swedish banks for several years have faced increasingly strict requirements on customer due diligence and money laundering controls, and how new EU rules risk intensifying this development further.

The new European AML package, adopted in 2024 and introduced gradually until 2027, has already affected banks’ risk assessments. More customers are flagged, more transactions are scrutinized, and investigations tend to become more drawn out.

The new EU agency AMLA, based in Frankfurt, will play a central role in the joint fight against money laundering. But according to Wykman, its function is mainly overarching and aimed at larger cross-border actors, rather than directly governing the relationship between individual banks and customers.

Financial Supervisory Authority: Other Measures Should Be Tried First

Realtid has also previously reported the Financial Supervisory Authority’s view that banks should be cautious about using account closures as a first resort. The agency has emphasized that access to a payment account is crucial in today’s society and that those who lose their account and digital services can quickly end up in a very vulnerable position.

According to Realtid’s review, the Financial Supervisory Authority wants banks to consider alternative, risk-reducing measures in every individual case before an account is closed entirely. This could involve limiting certain services or products instead of completely cutting the customer off from the banking system. The authority has also called for clearer documentation of the decisions.

In previous reports cited by Realtid, FI has stated that more bank customers should be offered payment accounts, and that banks still need to improve their efforts to avoid making the situation unnecessarily worse for consumers.

Cases Where People Are Excluded from Everyday Life

Realtid has, in a series of articles, described how account closures and blocked security solutions have had dramatic consequences for both individuals and business owners. One of the most notable cases is that of Michael Fridebäck, whose Nordea account was blocked and who, according to Realtid’s reports, subsequently lost both access to his money and the ability to use BankID.

Realtid has reported that the consequences for him were extensive: difficulties handling tax returns, bookkeeping, annual accounts, salary payments, and contact with authorities. The bank declined to comment on the individual case but told Realtid that banks must comply with the regulations regarding money laundering and customer due diligence, and that BankID is not considered a basic function that must remain open in all situations.

Samnytt has recently followed up on the case and spoken to Michael Fridebäck. The article and video report can be seen below.

At the same time, Realtid has also reported how several banks defend their tightened controls by citing increased fraud risks, more dubious actors, and tougher demands from the outside world. Among others, ICA Banken, SEB, and Länsförsäkringar have described how their security work has had to intensify.

Long Waits Worsen the Harm

Wykman also points out in the interview with Realtid that the problem is not just the decision to stop or limit an account but how long people are left in limbo. Historical deficiencies in civil registration and other public systems, according to him, have also contributed to the uncertainty.

But that does not change the banks’ responsibility. They must allocate sufficient resources for customer due diligence, investigation, and customer contact, so that people are not left without information for months of uncertainty. Customers, in turn, need to be prepared to explain their finances and transactions, while banks must ensure that questions are asked in a professional and reasonable manner.

A Possible Way Forward

Despite the criticism and growing problems, Wykman still sees possibilities for improvement. His position is that clearer accountability, better guidance, and stronger cooperation between authorities and banks can reduce both uncertainty and unreasonable consequences for individual customers.

“When it becomes clearer what different actors should do, and when authorities cooperate, things get better.”

That message is unlikely to reassure all those already severely affected by the banks’ actions. But the interview nevertheless marks that the issue has now clearly reached the political level. The government is now publicly admitting the conflict that has arisen when the fight against financial crime hits ordinary citizens and businesses to an unreasonable extent.