An Indian entrepreneur has said he was forced to leave Sweden after running into repeated problems with the country’s immigration system, claiming bureaucratic delays and shifting rules left him no option but to sell his startup and return to India. His public account has amplified debate about how immigration regimes affect international founders and talent mobility.
Startup built in Skellefteå
Abhijith Nag Balasubramanya, an engineer with qualifications in electrical engineering, international marketing and sustainable agriculture, founded Hydro Space Sweden AB in Skellefteå, northern Sweden. The company cultivated microgreens, positioning itself as a local, climate-resilient solution for fresh produce and food sustainability.
Within six months the venture reportedly created jobs and secured a steady customer base. Observers noted the business aligned with Sweden’s reputation for innovation in sustainable food systems, particularly given the agricultural constraints of the region’s climate.
Administrative hurdles and criticism of Migration Agency
In a LinkedIn post that rapidly drew attention, Balasubramanya criticised the Swedish Migration Agency for frequent documentation changes, unclear guidance and prolonged decision-making. He said these issues consumed his time and resources, preventing him from focusing on business operations.
He alleged lack of transparency in decisions affecting his residency and continuity of business, and said the system did not adequately recognise or accommodate the needs of foreign entrepreneurs. Describing his exit as more akin to an “eviction” than a voluntary departure, he said the process left him emotionally and mentally strained.
Decision to sell and return to India
Faced with the prospect of lengthy and costly legal proceedings, Balasubramanya chose not to pursue litigation. Citing the financial burden and emotional toll, he sold Hydro Space Sweden AB and returned to India. In his farewell message he thanked customers and local supporters, stressing that his grievance was with the system rather than with individuals.
The episode has prompted entrepreneurs and diasporic professionals to share similar accounts of visa and residency challenges in other countries, highlighting a recurring vulnerability for founders operating abroad.
Broader implications for talent mobility and policy
The case has reignited discussion on how immigration frameworks shape startup ecosystems. As countries compete to attract innovation and skilled professionals, bureaucratic friction can deter mobility and investment, undermining broader policy goals to foster entrepreneurship.
For India—experiencing rapid startup growth and increasing numbers of founders seeking international opportunities—such incidents underscore the value of strengthening domestic support for returnee entrepreneurs and ensuring clear, predictable pathways for cross-border founders.
Balasubramanya’s experience serves as both a personal setback and a cautionary example for policymakers: regulatory systems must balance compliance and national priorities with processes that support genuine entrepreneurial activity, reduce unnecessary uncertainty and protect founders’ well-being.
