Norway: Competent authority agreement entered into between Norway and the US

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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


Norway: Competent authority agreement entered into between Norway and the US

ragna.jpg

Ragna Flækøy Skjåkødegård

In January 2013, Norway and the US entered into a competent authority agreement, clarifying in which cases fiscally transparent entities are entitled to benefits under the Convention between the US and Norway for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income and Property (the treaty). The treaty's Paragraph 1 (a)(ii) of Article 3, on fiscal residence, states that the term "resident of Norway" means a partnership, estate or trust only to the extent that the income derived by such person is subject to Norwegian tax as the income of a resident. The corresponding paragraph regarding the US, Paragraph 1 (b)(ii) of Article 3, states that the term "resident of the United States" means a partnership, estate or trust only to the extent that such income is subject to tax as the income of a resident.

The competent authority agreement states that when applying the above mentioned paragraphs of Article 3, income from sources within Norway or the US, received by an entity, wherever organised, that is treated as fiscally transparent under the laws of either Norway or the US, will be treated as income derived by a resident of the other contracting state to the extent that such income is subject to tax as the income of a resident of that other contracting state.

The agreement provides the following example: If a resident of the US is a partner in a partnership or a member of a limited liability company (LLC) organised in the US, and the entity is treated for US federal tax purposes as a partnership, the resident of the US would be entitled to benefits of the treaty on the income that the resident derives from Norway through the partnership to the extent of the US resident's distributive share of that income.

The agreement states that for an entity to be fiscally transparent, the income subject to tax in the hands of the resident must have the same source and character as if the income were received directly by the resident. It is not relevant for the application of the agreement whether the entity is fiscally transparent for tax purposes in the other contracting state, or in any third jurisdiction in which the entity is organised.

Ragna Flækøy Skjåkødegård (rskjakodegard@deloitte.no)

Deloitte, Oslo

Tel: +47 23 27 96 00

Website: www.deloitte.no

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

The firm demonstrated its sweet spot of litigation with an international twist with the recent win for the Danish tax authority…but it’s not a tax case
The recently formed firm has taken a break from hiring EY talent to expand its transactional tax and tax technology capabilities
The AI platform, founded last year by two school friends, is partnering with challenger firms like Unity Advisory and A&M Tax to launch its own assault on the AI tax market
Not only has Aurtus received recognition from ITR in the past, but its founder was both a partner at KPMG and co-founder of Dhruva Advisors
Clients care more about considered counsel than rapid media-friendly soundbites, says Matthew Gilleard, associate director at Infinite
It was also a memorable night for Galicia, KPMG, Skadden and Pinheiro Neto, all of which scooped major awards at a gala ceremony in New York
The former Deloitte UK CEO earned a 45% raise in a year when 1,000 staff reportedly lost their jobs – and the pay gap is only getting bigger
In a seminal development for big law, the 95-year-old firm is set to cease operations after a series of high-profile partner departures
UK Chancellor John Healey extended a VAT cut, suspended tariffs, increased a bank surcharge and vowed to increase funding for HMRC
Kristine Riisberg warned that TP decisions can determine top-up tax exposure under pillar two, while global consensus over the rules remains unsettled
Gift this article