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"
- Norwegian Tax Agency Clarifies VAT Rules for Developers of Care Service Apartments
- Norwegian Tax Ruling: No VAT Compensation for Developers of Health Service Apartments
- Norway Court Confirms VAT on Cruises in Norwegian Waters, Affecting International Passengers
- Understanding VOEC: Simplified VAT System for Foreign E-Commerce Selling to Norway
- Norway launches a consultation on the introduction of mandatory e-invoicing for B2B transactions from January 2028
