The Swedish government has reinforced its stance on removing and deporting British citizens who failed to apply for residency permits after Brexit.
Migration Minister Johan Forssell defended the Swedish Migration Agency’s implementation of the Brexit withdrawal agreement on Wednesday, responding to an MP’s inquiry about Joyce Thomas, a 78‑year‑old British widow ordered to leave after 21 years in Sweden.
Forssell noted that the European Commission, tasked with ensuring EU member states correctly apply the withdrawal agreement, supports Sweden’s approach.
He said, “The Migration Board has reviewed the application of the withdrawal agreement and concluded that Sweden has fulfilled its obligations—a view shared by the Commission.”
Controversy has grown over removal orders targeting Britons unaware that Sweden is among the 13 EU states requiring a formal residency application after Brexit.
In a separate case, 34‑year‑old British national John Sellers was deported despite having lived in Sweden since age ten.
Thomas’s local MP, Häkan Svenneling, of the Left party, told the Guardian: “It seems to me that the Swedish government thinks everything is fine even though British citizens are being deported from Sweden right now. Not acting is also an action in this situation. What Sweden needs is a new government and a new migration minister who stops deporting people with strong connections to Sweden.”
In his written answer to Svenneling, Forssell offered British citizens facing deportation a sliver of hope. He said: “The relationship with the UK is very important to Sweden and the government will continue to safeguard the correct implementation of the withdrawal agreement. As part of this, the government is investigating whether further measures can be taken to facilitate the process in the future.”
Thomas has been told she must remove herself from Sweden by Tuesday 8 September or face deportation and a potential ban from the Schengen area.
She is one of several British citizens who have been faced with removal orders after the migration agency rejected their late applications to stay.
The UK Foreign Office has raised Sweden’s approach to late applications for post-Brexit residency a number of times in the specialised committee on citizens’ rights, a structure set up to ensure the withdrawal agreement is implemented properly.
David Milstead, who runs the grassroots organisation Brits in Sweden, said the Swedish response was not a surprise. “The government was hardly going to disown the decisions of [the migration agency] or the Swedish courts. The real question is whether Sweden’s approach is consistent with EU law and the [withdrawal agreement],” he said.
He pointed out that under the agreement, the UK was obliged to set up a statutory body, the Independent Monitoring Authority (IMA), to independently ensure the Home Office implemented the Brexit deal correctly, while the European Commission performed the correspondent role for EU member states.
“The IMA has taken a much more robust approach. It is hard to imagine it not challenging the UK had it operated a policy like Sweden’s, which would have put the rights of around a quarter of a million successful late applicants [in the UK] at risk,” Milstead said.
“Sweden’s approach now needs either to be tested before the European court of justice or addressed through measures that remedy the problem. The government’s response leaves open the possibility of change, and that must include fixing unjust deportation decisions.”
The European Commission has been approached for comment.
According to Eurostat data, between 2021 and 2025 a total of 2,490 UK nationals were ordered to leave Sweden. Analysis by the Foreign Office found this was 32.9% of the 7,565 UK nationals ordered to leave the 27 EU member states over this period. Although it is not possible to determine exactly how many were in Sweden prior to the end of the UK-EU transition period, it is likely that the majority will have been.
Thomas has been in Sweden for 21 years and says her late husband inquired about the impact of Brexit and was told by the authorities there was nothing they needed to do to remain in the country legally.
The couple moved to the country to be close to their son and grandchildren, and Thomas said she had been left feeling sick with worry after receiving the removal order.
Also Read
- FCC Proposes Robocall Scorecard to Rate Providers’ Consumer Protection Efforts
- Bali Restaurant Catches Fire After Birthday Party Balloon Incident
- Examining the Misinformation That Influenced Iceland’s EU Membership Referendum
- Understanding the UK Bond Market Surge and Implications for the Upcoming Budget

