Electronics Retailer’s ‘Baby Bonus’ Refund Offer Draws Complaints and Criticism in Sweden
Power offers full in‑store credit to women who become pregnant within 30 days of a purchase; campaign prompts complaints to advertising authorities and public outcry
An electronics retailer’s promotion in Sweden offering female customers a full refund if they become pregnant within 30 days of a purchase has prompted complaints to the country’s advertising ombudsman and sharp criticism from feminist groups and other commentators.
Power, a Norwegian supplier operating 29 stores in Sweden, has described the initiative as a “baby bonus” designed to highlight what it called Sweden’s historically low birth rate and to cut through advertising fatigue. Under the promotion, women over 20 who can provide a medical certificate proving conception within 30 days of buying an item at a Power branch and whose expected due date falls between 260 and 303 days after the purchase are eligible for a refund paid as in‑store credit. The company said refunds would be honoured whether the customer bought small items such as an electric toothbrush or larger household appliances.
The campaign has included advertising copy that critics have called explicit and demeaning, including a slogan reported as "A deal that might make you throw up" and other language that referenced sexual activity. Critics said the promotion commodified women and likened its tone to dystopian portrayals of women as child‑bearers. Several groups and individuals have reported the campaign to Sweden’s national advertising ombudsman, according to media reports.
Eddie Hernandez, head of marketing at Power, defended the move in posts and interviews, saying the company sought to create attention for a social discussion on population decline and to stand out in a crowded retail market. In a LinkedIn statement cited by media, Hernandez said the campaign was intended to contribute to debate around Sweden’s low birth rate and that the promotion was a way to surprise consumers. He told The Times the campaign was not intended to objectify women and that electronics can sometimes be blamed for getting in the way of intimacy.
Sweden’s fertility rate stood at about 1.4 births per woman, data cited by the retailer and media showed, and the number of births fell 1.7 percent in the first half of 2025 compared with the same period in 2024. In the first six months of 2025, 49,700 children were born in Sweden, a total reported as the country’s lowest half‑year number in 23 years.
The promotion is the latest controversy for Power. Media reports note that last year the retailer withdrew a separate advertisement that offered a 50 percent discount to any customer willing to tattoo the company logo on their body, after public backlash.
Swedish advertising standards authorities have in past cases criticised marketing they regarded as lacking social responsibility. Media accounts said the national advertising watchdog has ruled that some promotions by the retailer had "lacked social and professional responsibility." The office handling complaints is expected to review grievances filed over the current campaign under its standard procedures.
Industry analysts and consumer advocates said the campaign highlights tensions between attention‑grabbing marketing and social norms. Some ethicists and advertising critics warned that tying commercial incentives to reproductive behaviour raises legal and ethical questions, while others noted retailers often use provocative messaging to generate publicity.
Power said in its public materials that the promotion was a store‑specific, time‑limited campaign linked to the broader issue of demographic trends. The company did not provide additional details on the expected cost of the scheme or how many refunds it anticipates issuing. The advertising ombudsman and Power did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The complaint filings and any subsequent rulings by advertising authorities are likely to clarify whether the campaign breaches Sweden’s advertising code and whether the specific language used in the ads violates standards on social responsibility and non‑discrimination. The case is expected to draw further attention as regulators consider the balance between creative marketing and protections against messaging deemed exploitative or discriminatory.