A has appealed [tax office x]’s binding prior statement […] of 5 April 2017. [Tax office x] concluded in the BFU that a planned joint registration, where A is the reporting entity, could not demand a recurring tax settlement according to the Value Added Tax Act § 8- 6 for input VAT, which was incurred within a D-joint registration.
Source: skatteetaten.no
Latest Posts in "Norway"
- Norway Clarifies VAT Compensation Rules for Merged Companies and Post-Merger Claims
- Norwegian Fiscalization: General Overview and EV Charger Legal and VAT Treatment
- Norway Clarifies VAT Pre-Registration and Input VAT Deductions in Business Transfers
- Tax Directorate Decision on VAT Compensation Claims After Company Mergers and Registration Requirements
- Norway Clarifies Output VAT Duties for Dealers Registering and Exporting Vehicles After Deregistration
