International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Norway: Norway seeks new statutory general anti-avoidance rule

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_deloitte.png
Courts in India have generally given a wide connotation to the expression

In Norway, the GAAR is non-statutory, and the rule has been largely developed by the Supreme Court.

On April 10 2019, Norway's Ministry of Finance (MoF) published the proposal for a new statutory general-anti-avoidance-rule (GAAR).

Norway's tax authorities have used the rule to target mainly tax driven transactions that have been deemed contrary to a specific tax rule. In Norway, the GAAR is non-statutory, and the rule has been largely developed by the Supreme Court.

The main reason for the proposed rule was that the MoF disagreed with some of the assessments that were made by the Supreme Court in anti-avoidance cases regarding three particular judgments: Telenor, Hydro Canada, and ConocoPhillips III.

Telenor – assessment of intent

The main objection against the Telenor case was that the Supreme Court, when assessing whether the transaction was mainly tax driven, adjusted the assessment of intention(s) from an objective test deducing intent from documents, to a subjective one, where the decisive is subjective motivation of the taxpayer in question.

The MoF has proposed that this subjective test will be replaced by an objective motive test (i.e. an assessment of the motives of a hypothetically rational person in the same situation, with respect to tax and other effects). If the transaction is mainly tax driven, the first of two conditions for applying the GAAR is fulfilled. The threshold for being mainly tax driven is not 51%, but probably around 70%, which means that a transaction should not be captured if non-tax reasons for carrying out the transaction is 35% or higher.

Hydro Canada – foreign taxes

The second condition for applying the GAAR is a concrete overall assessment of certain criteria mentioned in the law and preparatory works in order to decide whether the GAAR shall be applied (previously often referred to as the disloyalty condition).

Under the current GAAR, discerning whether the taxation applied is contrary to the tax provision is the most important criteria in the overall assessment. Under the new GAAR, non-tax business reasons should be a more important factor in the overall assessment.

In the Hydro Canada case, foreign tax consequences were considered business legitimate reasons to prevent the application of the non-statutory GAAR. Even though non-tax effects will have a more provident position under the new GAAR, foreign tax effects will no longer be deemed a business reason and will thus be disregarded under the GAAR.

The MoF is of the opinion that the same should apply for other Norwegian indirect taxes and duties, which means that saving stamp duty on real estate transfers cannot be regarded as a business effect under the new rule.

ConocoPhillips III – relevance of preparatory work statements

In ConocoPhillips III, the taxpayer de-merged real estate (tax free) in a real estate company and sold the shares utilising the participation exemption method. A direct transfer of the real estate would have triggered a taxable capital gain.

The Supreme Court accepted the transaction for tax purposes because the use of real estate companies and a tax exempt sale of shares was mentioned in the preparatory works. The risk had been implicitly accepted by Parliament because no changes were made to the rules to prevent it. In addition, the taxation was deemed to be in accordance with the de-merger and participation exemption rules.

The latter rule is called the 'tool rule' to achieve tax avoidance and is used to circumvent the more burdensome capital gains rule in the ConocoPhillips III case.

Both the mention of possible avoidance schemes in preparatory works and that the transaction is in accordance with the objectives behind a tool (to achieve tax avoidance) shall not in itself prevent the use of the new GAAR.

Application for VAT

The new GAAR will also apply for VAT in addition to social security, payroll, income and net wealth taxes. In Norway, the non-statutory GAAR has not been applied by the Supreme Court in VAT cases, and it will be interesting to see whether the VAT authorities will build on guidance found in income tax cases or VAT anti-avoidance case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU).

Consequences

The Supreme Court loses in the aforementioned cases resulted in fewer cases where the GAAR was applied by the tax authorities.

It will be interesting to see whether the use of the GAAR will increase when the new GAAR becomes effective from January 1 2020.

It is stated in the preparatory works that the proposal is not expected to raise any significant revenues compared to the current GAAR. However, the reduced threshold for using the GAAR could entail that the statement in the preparatory works is not accurate.

By making non-tax effects and other criteria more important, this makes GAAR decisions more concrete, and the relevance for other cases more limited than under the current GAAR.

Consequently, this will make it necessary to carry out a more detailed GAAR assessment when tax benefits are involved in transactions and the outcome of other cases are of less helpful to the assessment.

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

PwC publishes detailed accounts of its behaviour in the tax scandal in Australia, while another tax trial looms for pop star Shakira.
The winners of the ITR Europe, Middle East, and Africa Tax Awards 2023 have been announced!
The winners of the ITR Asia-Pacific Tax Awards 2023 have been announced!
Mauro Faggion appeared cautiously optimistic as the European Commission waits to see whether all 27 member states will accept its proposal.
The global minimum rate also won’t entirely stop a race to the bottom, according to a tax director speaking at an ITR conference in London.
The country’s tax authorities are not interested in seeing transfer pricing studies any more, it was claimed at an ITR industry conference in London.
The controversial measure is being watered down after criticism from the European Central Bank.
More than 600 such requests were made in 2022, while HMRC has also bolstered its fraud service, it has been revealed.
The General Court reverses its position taken four years ago, while the UN discusses tax policy in New York.
Discussion on amount B under the first part of the OECD's two-pronged approach to international tax reform is far from over, if the latest consultation is anything go by.