Norwegian parliament ends GAAR discussion regarding pre-transaction reorganisations
International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX
Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

Norwegian parliament ends GAAR discussion regarding pre-transaction reorganisations

Sponsored by

Sponsored_Firms_deloitte.png
The discussion seems to be settled, for the moment.

Daniel Herde and Oscar Brown of Deloitte present the status of the newly codified general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR) and its applicability on reorganisations in connection with a transaction.

Norway recently codified its general anti-avoidance rule (GAAR). The GAAR had existed for more than a century and had been developed by the Supreme Court through numerous judgments. The provision was intended to codify existing practice, without making any major amendments to the rule itself. 

The preparatory work by the Ministry of Finance left it unclear whether the practice regarding GAARs applicability for pre-transaction reorganisations would be continued under the codified GAAR. The Finance Committee in the parliament addressed the question in connecting with the adoption of the law, stating that the existing practice regarding GAAR and pre-transactions reorganisations should be upheld under the codified GAAR. 



Short on previous administrative practice of not using the GAAR on pre-transaction reorganisations 



Before the codification, assets could be demerged into a single purpose vehicle (SPV) and sold tax exempt through a sale of shares in the SPV, without triggering the GAAR. It was not a problem that the reorganisation was carried out in connection with a transaction with a third party, meaning that a pre-transaction reorganisation could take place e.g. between signing and closing of an agreement. 



For real estate, the important precedence was the ConocoPhillips III case from the Norwegian Supreme Court. Following the judgment, the Directorate of Taxes issued a statement regarding the consequences of the ConocoPhillips III case, stating that the reasoning by the Supreme Court should be applied in similar pending cases, irrespective of the asset in question. This resulted in a change in the administrative practice from the Norwegian tax authorities (NTA), in line with the ConocoPhillips III reasoning. This practice gave Norwegian businesses flexibility to organise its assets as best suited, whilst maintaining the possibility to defer capital gain taxation on a sale of the asset equating this with a sale of shares. 



The following rematch



In connection with the state budget for 2020 prepared by the Ministry of Finance, it was stated that the remarks by the Finance Committee were ambiguous, arguing that it was uncertain whether the committee had referred to the ConocoPhillips III case concerning real estate or the following administrative practice that covered both real estate and other assets. 



The parliament did not flinch: In connection with the adoption of the state budget, the Finance Committee stressed that the existing administrative practice covering real estate and other assets should be continued under the codified GAAR. Further, the committee noted that any additional amendments to the ambit of the GAAR should come through additional legislation and implicitly not through comments made in the state budget. 



The state of play



Following the second round in the parliament, the NTA later published a binding ruling on the subject. In the ruling, the NTA stated that the demerger of the operational part of a business into a SPV would not be subject to the GAAR, with reference to the statements made by parliament a month earlier. 



The discussion on GAARs applicability on pre-transactions reorganisations therefore seem to have been settled, at least for the moment. The result is that it generally is possible to demerge assets into a SPVs and sell the shares in the SPV tax exempt without triggering the newly codified GAAR. 



There are still things to watch out for. The situation is closely monitored by the NTA. Further, it is not to be forgotten that the previous practice also had its limits. For the more complex fact patterns, the risk of GAAR could be higher than previously, and should be subject to a more thorough assessment before implementation. Another important change to the GAAR is that foreign tax savings is no longer a business reason, which was something that could prevent the application of the GAAR under the non-statutory rule. Hence, cross-border planning where the aim is to achieve foreign and Norwegian tax savings could now be captured by the GAAR.



Daniel Herde

T: +47 23 27 90 02

E: dherde@deloitte.no



Oscar Brown

T: +47 986 75 850

E: oscbrown@deloitte.no





more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Alex Gerko had challenged HMRC’s positions on deferred trading profits that he and other traders made while working for hedge fund GSA
The Tax Practitioners Board had required PwC to overhaul its internal processes following the tax leaks scandal
With corporate tax rates already exceeding 15%, India will need to think creatively to extract additional revenue through new pillar two rules, local partners tell ITR
France continues to be a hot spot for tax lateral partner moves, according to ITR+’s Talent Tracker
Losses for HM Revenue and Customs and the Australian Taxation Office, cum-ex fraud and a 'mysterious funder' all feature in ITR’s list of 2024’s most significant tax cases so far
New requirements for advisers to inform clients of any relevant matters that might impact their relationship have raised concerns from a raft of professional bodies
The fallout from PwC China’s Evergrande audit has reportedly hit the firm hard; in other news, the US and Turkey look to reform their corporate tax rates
Canada risks inflaming US trade relations in a presidential election year and increasing costs for consumers, according to local experts
Dudbridge, ForrestBrown director and head of its advisory practice, FB Consulting, tells ITR about the joys of tax advisory work, what he finds most exciting about the role and what makes tax cool
A UK court rejected Tills Plus’s claim for R&D tax credits due to a lack of technological advancement
Gift this article