.jpg)
.svg)
Sweden has confirmed that 458 British citizens have been deported or forcibly removed since Brexit, revealing for the first time the scale of removals involving Britons who failed to secure post-Brexit residency rights. The figures, confirmed by the Swedish Migration Agency, have intensified criticism of Sweden’s handling of British citizens who had established their lives in the country before the UK left the European Union.
The cases include people who had lived in Sweden for decades, elderly residents and individuals who arrived in the country as children. Activists representing Britons in Sweden say the newly disclosed figure does not provide a complete picture of the number of people who have been forced to leave or remain in Sweden with uncertain immigration status.
The disclosure comes as deportations continue and Swedish authorities face renewed calls to review how late applications under the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement are assessed.
The Swedish Migration Agency, known as Migrationsverket, confirmed the figure after questions about the number of British citizens affected by rejected applications for post-Brexit residence status.
A spokesperson told the Guardian that the agency’s statistics showed a rejection of an application for residence status had been accompanied by a deportation decision in 458 cases.
Susanna Fonsell, a unit manager and legal expert at the Swedish Migration Agency, separately said that a rejected application did not automatically result in deportation and that agency statistics had recorded approximately 400 such cases.
The difference between the figures appears to reflect different stages or definitions within the available statistics, making greater transparency a central demand among campaigners.
The cases have attracted particular attention because some of those facing removal had spent most of their lives in Sweden.
David Milstead, who leads the 9,000-member activist organisation Brits in Sweden, said the figure needed to be examined in greater detail to establish exactly what the 458 cases represented.
He questioned whether the statistics included people who voluntarily left after realising their applications were unlikely to succeed, as well as individuals who were initially refused Withdrawal Agreement status but later obtained residence permits under Swedish national law.
Milstead also pointed to Britons who remain in Sweden on temporary permits and therefore face continuing uncertainty over their long-term future.
He argued that the piecemeal publication of immigration statistics had created a broader transparency problem, particularly because basic information about late applications and their success rates remains unavailable.
Available figures show that 14,233 applications for post-Brexit residency had been made in Sweden by 2024, including applications involving family members who joined British citizens after the original deadline.
Almost 4,000 applications were rejected, according to analysis by the UK's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office. The reported refusal rate was substantially higher than the EU average of around 3% to 4%.
Under the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement, people who missed the deadline can still submit late applications in both the EU and UK, but they must demonstrate reasonable grounds for failing to apply on time.
The UK's Foreign Office has previously warned that, in practice, late applicants in Sweden are unlikely to have their reasons accepted.
The issue remains active, with further cases emerging this week.
The wife of a former Cambridge business director said her husband was detained in Stockholm ahead of a forced removal after the couple had spent five years challenging the Swedish migration authorities' decision.
Another case involved John Sellers, a 34-year-old British man who had lived in Sweden since he was 10. He was deported despite having built his life there, separating him from his wife in Gothenburg.
His wife, Caroline, said Brexit had caused severe consequences for families who had established their lives in another European country.
An additional case concerns Joyce Thomas, 78, a British widow who has been ordered to leave Sweden. Friends are seeking legal intervention to prevent her removal.
If she fails to comply with the order, she could face forced deportation and a re-entry ban that could restrict her ability to enter Sweden and potentially other Schengen countries while the ban remains in force.
The Swedish Migration Agency has rejected suggestions that it has applied the Withdrawal Agreement in an unusually severe manner.
The agency said Sweden had applied the relevant law and that affected individuals had been given opportunities to appeal decisions.
Swedish Migration Minister Johan Forssell has also defended the government's approach while acknowledging concerns about the process. He said the relationship between Sweden and the UK remained important and that the government was examining whether further measures could make the system easier to navigate in future.
The UK's Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office said it continued to raise the issue with Swedish authorities and welcomed the Swedish government's willingness to examine the matter.
Daily Dazzling Dawn understands that the dispute is now centred not only on individual deportation cases but also on whether Sweden's handling of late Withdrawal Agreement applications provides sufficient safeguards for British citizens who established their lives in the country before Brexit.
Niels Paarup-Petersen, migration spokesperson for Sweden's opposition Centre Party, has called for a more substantial change.
He said that, if the party enters government after the country's forthcoming general election, it would seek to introduce legislation allowing affected British citizens to reapply for post-Brexit residence.
The controversy highlights one of the lasting consequences of Brexit for British citizens who had exercised their freedom of movement rights before the UK's departure from the EU. While governments on both sides maintain that the Withdrawal Agreement provides a legal framework for protecting those rights, campaigners argue that the experience of some families demonstrates significant gaps between the agreement's protections and their practical application.
