Mullvad ownership and trust
Mullvad donation controversy: What happened and should you switch?
Daniel Berntsson, one of Mullvad VPN's two founders, owners and co-CEOs, personally donated 5 million Swedish kronor to Örebropartiet in 2025. The gift supplied 72% of the Swedish party's income for the year, according to the financial disclosure reviewed by Flamman.
The donation is real, large and relevant to anyone who considers company ownership when choosing a VPN. It was not a donation by Mullvad, and the controversy has not exposed a logging failure, a breach or weakened encryption. Those distinctions matter.
What has been verified
| Claim | Finding | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Berntsson gave SEK 5 million | Confirmed | Party income disclosure and Berntsson's confirmation to Flamman |
| The gift was 72% of 2025 income | Confirmed by the disclosure review | Flamman reporting |
| Mullvad made the donation | Not supported | Berntsson, Mullvad and co-owner Fredrik Strömberg all describe it as personal |
| Berntsson owns half of the business | Confirmed by the other co-owner | Strömberg stated that each founder owns 50% |
| Mullvad's privacy technology failed | No evidence from this controversy | No reported change to logging, encryption, infrastructure or account handling |
What happened
Swedish newspaper Flamman disclosed the donor on June 26, 2026 after reviewing Örebropartiet's 2025 income report. Berntsson confirmed the gift by email: "This is a donation from me personally."
The amount made the story much bigger than an ordinary political donation. Flamman reported that SEK 5 million represented 72% of the party's total income and was the largest single private donation to a Swedish political party in 2025. DonationWatch, which imports data from Sweden's Legal, Financial and Administrative Services Agency, also shows a sharp rise in Örebropartiet's reported funding.
Örebropartiet began as a local party in Örebro and decided in autumn 2025 to run in Sweden's 2026 national election. Its own website still described the national platform as a work in progress in July 2026. That makes careful wording necessary: the party has a public record, but not a settled national manifesto that answers every policy question.
Why Örebropartiet is controversial
The party is difficult to place on a conventional left-right line. Co-founder Markus Allard came from Sweden's Left Party, while Örebropartiet mixes attacks on privatization and political privilege with nationalism and hardline immigration positions. TechRadar calls it populist. Flamman cites anti-racism foundation Expo describing its recent direction as far right and ethnonationalist.
The least ambiguous description is the party's stated position. Allard has called for "extensive remigration," argued that citizenship should be revocable and said immigrants should be sent out of Sweden. Berntsson told Flamman that free movement was his ideal, but that Sweden's crime, immigration and integration policies had created the present situation. Asked about remigration, he said it was sad that it was needed.
Remigration is not a narrow change to visa rules. In the way Allard has discussed it, the policy would require the state to decide who may remain, revisit some citizenship decisions and enforce removals. Critics see an obvious conflict between that program and Mullvad's campaigns against identity checks and state surveillance. The exact enforcement machinery is not yet in Örebropartiet's unfinished 2026 platform, so claims about a specific future surveillance system remain an inference rather than a published party plan.
Berntsson's explanation
On July 20, Berntsson published a lengthy explanation on his personal website. He describes himself as a libertarian anarchist and says involvement in electoral politics creates a moral dilemma. His support was not framed as agreement with the party's whole program.
Berntsson praised Örebropartiet's analysis of Sweden's tax-funded political and professional class, its response to alleged local government failures, its support for direct democracy and its willingness to confront established institutions. He also wrote that he does not like most of the party's policies, does not consider it fit to run the country and does not want it to gain a great deal of power. His conclusion was that giving the party an advantage in local political competition might produce a net benefit.
That explanation adds context. It does not make the donation politically neutral. A donor can support selected reasons while the recipient spends one budget across its full campaign.
How Mullvad responded
Mullvad first separated the donation from the company, then published a fuller "Donation controversy" statement on July 20. The company said Mullvad, Amagicom and Tillitis neither endorsed nor participated in the gift.
The statement did not condemn Berntsson. Mullvad said it neither condoned nor condemned the donation, called it "most likely" a bad idea and defended a culture of tolerance around views outside the company's narrow work on privacy, free speech, censorship and mass surveillance.
Fredrik Strömberg was more direct in comments to TechRadar. Speaking personally, he said he disliked the donation and that many colleagues shared that view. Speaking as co-CEO, he said Mullvad would continue to defend the universal right to privacy. In a later Hacker News discussion, he confirmed that Berntsson and he each own 50% of the company.
Mullvad also offered to refund customers who wanted to leave because of the disagreement. Its normal refund policy covers only some payment methods and generally has a 14-day limit. Cash, cryptocurrency and voucher payments are excluded, while app-store refunds go through the store. Customers asking for a controversy-related exception should contact support rather than assume it applies.
Is this a privacy or security failure?
Not on the evidence published so far. The controversy has not shown that Mullvad logs browsing, weakened WireGuard, changed its account-number model or exposed customer data. It changes what users know about one owner's political spending.
Mullvad's technical record still deserves independent scrutiny. In 2026, the company published a security assessment of its Android app, a white-box review of account and payment services, and an audit of its GotaTun WireGuard implementation. The 2023 police search of its Gothenburg office ended without customer information being seized because Mullvad said the requested data did not exist.
None of those facts proves permanent safety. Audits are snapshots, and real products still have bugs. Our report on the Android 16 Tiny UDP Cannon bypass, for example, covers an operating-system path that affected VPN apps generally. That issue was separate from the donation and was not evidence of Mullvad logging users.
The ownership problem is still real
Calling the donation personal resolves the accounting question presented by current evidence. It does not erase the economic link. Mullvad VPN AB and parent company Amagicom AB are wholly owned by Berntsson and Strömberg, and both remain active in the business. Subscription revenue supports the company, and its profits and value benefit the owners.
That does not make each customer the indirect author of every owner decision. It does mean that customers can reasonably include ownership conduct in a purchase decision. This is especially relevant for a privacy service because users cannot inspect the live server fleet themselves. They depend on governance, incentives and a long record of keeping promises as well as code and audits.
Should you leave Mullvad?
Stay if Mullvad still fits your threat model, you accept the distinction between a private donation and company policy, and its account model, cash payments, open-source apps and technical work remain more important to you than the owner's conduct.
Leave if ownership ethics are part of your trust model, you see the 50% stake as a direct economic connection, or Mullvad's non-condemnation makes you doubt how the company would handle a future conflict between its mission and its owners.
Do not switch in a rush to a provider you have examined less carefully. Every commercial VPN has owners, a jurisdiction, a payment model and operational tradeoffs. Compare those facts first, then test the replacement with our IP, DNS and WebRTC leak test and VPN kill switch test.
Best Mullvad alternatives by priority
There is no exact replacement. Mullvad combines anonymous account numbers, cash and Monero payments, open-source apps, flat monthly pricing and a long public security record. The best alternative depends on which part you are trying to replace.
| Provider | Best fit | Why consider it | Tradeoff to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| IVPN | Closest privacy-first substitute | No email at sign-up, cash and Monero, open-source apps, public team and ownership, annual security audits | It is 100% owned by one person, has a smaller network and does not run an affiliate program |
| Proton VPN | Governance and a larger privacy ecosystem | Primarily owned by the nonprofit Proton Foundation, open-source apps, a 2026 no-logs audit and a usable free plan | Uses a conventional account, bundles can be more complex and Swiss surveillance proposals deserve monitoring |
| Windscribe | Flexible plans and device coverage | Open-source apps, RAM-disk infrastructure, a configurable free plan and a public record from a Dutch server seizure | Its tone and product model differ from Mullvad, and its last-use and bandwidth counters should be read carefully in the privacy policy |
| NordVPN | Broad location coverage and streaming | Large network, independently reviewed no-logs controls, mature apps and wide streaming support | Conventional account and subscription model, and it is not a like-for-like anonymous-payment replacement |
| Surfshark | Households and lower introductory pricing | Unlimited simultaneous devices, RAM-only servers, WireGuard and MultiHop | Renewal pricing and the larger Nord Security corporate relationship may matter if ownership simplicity is your main concern |
IVPN: the closest match to Mullvad's account model
IVPN is the most natural starting point for readers who used Mullvad because it asks for no email address and accepts cash, Bitcoin and Monero. Its apps and website are open source, it publishes its team and legal-request record, and it has scheduled its eighth annual security audit for 2026.
It is not a solution to concentrated owner risk. IVPN states that founder Nicholas Pestell owns 100% of IVPN Limited. What IVPN offers is unusually direct disclosure and a published ethics policy, not diversified ownership. IVPN also has no affiliate program, so DoVPN receives nothing if you choose it.
Proton VPN: the clearest governance alternative
Proton AG says it is primarily owned by the nonprofit Proton Foundation. That creates a different governance structure from a company split between two active founders. Proton also publishes open-source apps and passed its fifth consecutive annual no-logs audit in 2026.
Proton is a broader account-based ecosystem rather than Mullvad's minimalist numbered account. It is also Swiss, so readers should follow the debate over proposed Swiss surveillance rules instead of treating jurisdiction as a permanent guarantee.
Windscribe: practical flexibility with real-world evidence
Windscribe is worth comparing if you need flexible plans, many devices or obfuscation options. It publishes app code, describes RAM-disk infrastructure and reports limited rolling usage data rather than connection histories. Its response to a server seizure in the Netherlands provides useful evidence, with the usual caveat that the public account comes from the provider. Read our full Windscribe server-seizure analysis for the details.
For a wider market view, compare these options in our best VPN guide and check protocol evidence in the VPN protocol comparison. Do not choose solely from a political controversy or a discount.
How to switch without creating a privacy gap
- Choose the replacement first. Check sign-up data, payment options, ownership, jurisdiction, audits, open-source coverage and the devices you actually use.
- Install it alongside Mullvad. Do not run both tunnels at once. Confirm that the new app works on each device before removing the old one.
- Enable the kill switch and DNS protection. Recheck split tunneling, local-network access and auto-connect because defaults differ between apps.
- Test before canceling. Change from Wi-Fi to mobile data, suspend and wake the device, and run leak tests with the browser and apps you normally use.
- Ask Mullvad about the refund. Include only the account and transaction information support needs. Anonymous cash payments may not be recoverable.
A VPN replaces your internet provider as the party operating the first encrypted hop. That is why switching should be a measured trust decision, not a symbolic uninstall. Our guide to what a VPN can and cannot protect explains the limits before you compare brands.
Latest position on July 29, 2026
Berntsson and Mullvad published their statements on July 20. Subsequent coverage has focused on the response and possible alternatives. No resignation, ownership change, reversal or evidence that company funds financed the donation has been reported.
The evidence supports a narrower conclusion than many viral posts. Berntsson made an exceptionally large political donation to a party campaigning on extensive remigration. Mullvad did not denounce it and remains half owned by him. None of that, by itself, demonstrates a failure of the VPN's encryption or no-logging design.
Sources
- Flamman: original disclosure and interview with Daniel Berntsson
- Mullvad: Donation controversy statement
- Daniel Berntsson: explanation for supporting Örebropartiet
- TechRadar: interview with Mullvad co-CEO Fredrik Strömberg
- Hacker News: Strömberg confirms the equal ownership split
- Mullvad: company ownership and history
- DonationWatch: Örebropartiet donation data
- IVPN: team and ownership disclosure
- Proton VPN: 2026 no-logs audit summary and report
Mullvad donation controversy: FAQ
No evidence shows a donation by Mullvad VPN AB, parent company Amagicom AB or sister company Tillitis AB. Daniel Berntsson, one of Mullvad's two co-founders, co-owners and co-CEOs, said the SEK 5 million donation was personal. Mullvad and fellow co-owner Fredrik Strömberg say the companies were not involved.
Mullvad says Mullvad VPN AB and parent company Amagicom AB are wholly owned by founders Daniel Berntsson and Fredrik Strömberg. Strömberg stated in July 2026 that they own 50% each and are both active as co-CEOs.
No. The donation controversy has not produced evidence that Mullvad changed its logging, encryption or account practices, or that user data was exposed. It is an ownership and values issue. Mullvad's technical claims still need to be judged on audits, source code, infrastructure and real-world events.
Nothing in the donation story shows that Mullvad's VPN tunnel became less secure. Mullvad published several security assessments in 2026, and its earlier no-logging design survived a 2023 police search without customer data being seized. Safety and willingness to support its owners are separate decisions.
IVPN is the closest match for people who value account numbers instead of email sign-up, cash and Monero payments, open-source apps and unusually direct ownership disclosure. Proton VPN is the stronger option if nonprofit foundation control, annual no-logs audits, a free plan and a larger network matter more.
Mullvad told TechRadar in June 2026 that it would gladly refund customers who wanted to cancel or switch because of philosophical disagreement. Eligibility can depend on the payment method and circumstances, so contact Mullvad support rather than assuming every payment can be reversed.
