I do not share economics professor Peter Englund's view that a housing crash would be unlikely, but he explains the mechanisms very well should such a crash occur. Why don't I share the view of the improbability of a crash? For one thing, I think there is a limit to how expensive an item can be. When Swedish houses are approaching the price of what was recently the price of medium-sized villas in upper-middle-class areas, I believe that the social economy is playing with fire.
Then there is always a lowbad economy historically and then one person's panic house sale can lead to another's which leads to the third's. Before Bildt's big start on the abolition of rental subsidies for low- and middle-income earners, there was a balance of demand for privately owned family housing. Today, the interest deductions for private homes are as expensive for society as the rental building subsidies were before Bildt's abolition of them. If you reduced the interest deductions and increased the subsidies for cost-effective rental properties, I think this would be a decisive solution. Admittedly, this would also lead to a crash in private housing prices, but I think such a crash is inevitable. If we continue without subsidizing rental properties, I just think the crash will be even bigger in the future when it does come.