WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  TN/TF/W/48 
10 June 2005 
 
 (05-2395) 
Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation Original:   English 
  
 
COMMUNICATION FROM NORWAY 
  
 The following communication, dated 9 June 2005, from the Delegation of Norway, is being 
circulated in advance of the Negotiating Group meeting of 13-14 June. 
 
_______________ 
 
 
WTO TRADE FACILITATION 
 
"BORDER AGENCY COOPERATION" 
 
Customs border cooperation between Norway, Sweden and Finland 
 
 
A Contribution from Norway 
 
 
I. BACKGROUND 
1. This paper provides information on customs border cooperation between Norway, Sweden 
and Finland, from a Norwegian perspective.  It is not intended as a proposal, but as a basis for 
stimulating thinking in an area where Norway h as gained extensive experience over a number of 
decades. 
2. Canada has previously put forward a proposal on "Possible Commitments on Border Agency 
Cooperation" (TN/TF/W/20).  The Canadian pape r deals with coordination and cooperation on a 
domestic level.  The present paper focuses on cooperation between different neighbouring countries , 
but it also employs some of the same principles a nd policies as those employed in the paper submitted 
by Canada.   
II. COOPERATION BETWEEN THE RELEVANT AUTHORITIES IN THE 
COUNTRIES INVOLVED  
3. Border cooperation between Norway, Sweden and Finland is based on the simple idea of 
division of labour:  the national border authorities of  each country are allowed to provide services and 
exercise legal powers not only on behalf of their home state, but that of their neighbouring states as 
well.  For example, when goods are exported from No rway, either a Swedish, Finnish or Norwegian 
customs office may take care of all paperwork related to exportation from Norway and importation 
into the said countries.1  This is also the case when goods ar e imported into Norway.  It should be 
noted that the borders between Norway and Swed en (1630 km) and Norway and Finland (736 km) 
generally lie in sparsely populated rural and highland areas.   
                                                      
1 Unlike Finland and Sweden, Norway is no t a member of the EC Customs Union. TN/TF/W/48 
Page 2  
 
 4. Border cooperation between neighbouring countr ies saves time, money and human resources, 
both for the border authorities and for the economic ope rators.  It is based on the principle that checks 
and formalities should be carried out at a  single spot,  and thus, that the customs authorities of one of 
the Contracting Parties may control the implem entation of customs provi sions, import and export 
provisions and any other provisions concerning trade on behalf of  the customs authorities of the other 
Contracting Party involved.  The infrastructure a nd allocation of customs offices at certain places 
along the long Norwegian-Swedish and Norwegian-Finni sh borders reflect the fact that, by virtue of 
the existence of these agreements, it is unnecessary to establish customs offices on both sides of the 
border, and to deploy customs officers both places.   
5. In general, the Border Cooperation Agreem ents provide that border inspections and 
formalities shall be carried out with the minimum pos sible delay and be centralized at one place only 
insofar as possible.  The Parties are expected to promote the use of simplified procedures and data processing and transmission techniques.  For instan ce, they shall allow for the various relevant 
authorities to delegate their inspection powers to  a service (preferably the customs service), which 
will carry out inspection on their behalf.  Departments shall be organized so as to reduce waiting time.  
If a disruption occurs with respect to the crossi ng of frontiers, the relevant authorities shall 
immediately inform the authorities of the other Partie s.  Plant health inspections are to be limited to 
random checks and sample testing only, unless duly  justified circumstances require otherwise.  
Frontier posts are open so that inspections and formalities relating to re gular importation of goods 
may be performed during an uninterrupted period of  at least ten hours from Monday to Friday, and at 
least six hours on Saturdays.  Goods placed under a customs transit procedure (with the corresponding 
inspections and formalities) can normally cross th e frontier posts twenty-four hours a day without 
unloading.  Parties are encouraged to establis h express lanes where technically possible.   
6. The border cooperation is formally established by  certain bilateral agreements, which are to 
be complied with as regards the cross-border moveme nt of goods.  The agreements cover all aspects 
of customs control and physical inspection, as we ll as documentation and customs clearance.    
7. Customs cooperation is also subject to prot ocols to the EEA Agreement (Agreement on the 
European Economic Area, i.e., the free-trade area covering the EU and the EFTA states Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein).
2  In response to an EEA requirement  for cooperation between the Parties 
in order to simplify the procedures for trade in goods, an EFTA Group of Experts on Efficient Trade 
Procedures (GEETP) was established, made up of expe rts in the field of trade facilitation from the 
respective EFTA countries.  The GEETP meets regular ly to coordinate trade efficiency activities 
within the EFTA structure and participates in international forums such as EUROPRPO and 
UN/CEFACT.3   
III. FACTS ON THE BORDER COOPERATION AGREEMENTS 
8. Some facts on the Border Cooperation Agreements: 
• Customs border cooperation between Norway and Sweden was established in 1960, after a three-
year trial period.  
                                                      
2Two Protocols were adopted on the " Simplification of inspections and formalities in respect of 
carriage of goods"  (Protocol 10) and " Mutual assistance in customs matters"  (Protocol 11) .  Thus, the 
Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA) require s Parties not only to simplify border controls and 
formalities, but also to assist each other in customs matte rs.  The EU has an agreemen t with Switzerland that is 
similar  to Protocol 10.   
3Practical aspects of EFTA s border cooperation policy are described inter alia in the OECD Document:  
The Relationship between Regional Trade Agreements and Multilateral Trading System – Trade Facilitation, 
TD/TC/WP(2002)17.  TN/TF/W/48 
 Page 3 
 
 
 • A joint control cooperation was establishe d between Norway and Sweden, involving 
18 Norwegian and 21 Swedish customs offices along the border. 
• Over the years, the scope of the border coopera tion has extended its scope to include customs 
clearance and providing services to traders and other economic operators. 
• A similar agreement with Finland entered into fo rce in 1969.  Due to language barriers, there are 
some differences compared with the cooperation w ith Sweden.  However, the principal elements 
are the same.   
• The border cooperation agreements between No rway and Sweden and between Norway and 
Finland are unique, and they were not affected by the fact that Sweden and Finland joined the EU 
in 1995.  An additional agreement with the EU allowing supervision and audits by the 
Commission was signed in 1997.4   
• Customs officers from both countries convene regularly , to be updated on the respective rules and 
regulations, and joint seminars are held regularly  for the customs officer s at the borders.   
• The Directors General of Customs meet at le ast once a year to discuss matters of common 
interest.   
• A control zone has been established on both sid es of the borders.  Within the control zones, 
Norwegian customs officers may carry out contro ls as far as 15 kilometres from the border into 
Sweden and Finland, and Swedish and Finnish offi cers may carry out controls 15 kilometres into 
Norway.   
 
IV. WHAT ARE THE RESULTS? 
9. For the customs authorities, border cooperation entails that:   
• The directors of certain Norwegian customs regi ons are entitled to instruct Swedish and Finnish 
customs officers in accordance w ith Norwegian customs law, and vice versa.  Thus, the total 
resources at the border are applied more effectively.   
• Relevant information is available for the custom s authorities on both sides of the borders at the 
same time.   
• For the economic operators, the results are rapid trade flow, due to only one stop at the border, 
and reduced costs related to customs clearance and transport.   
 V. PUBLIC RESOURCES SAVED 
10. Since the development of the border cooperati on has taken place over a number of years, it 
may be difficult to determine the benefits exactly.  Ho wever, to give an idea of the resources saved in 
Norway alone by the above agreements, a calculati on was made in 1995 of what the consequences 
would have been if the agreements had not been  approved by the EU while at the same time 
maintaining the same level of service:   
• 10 new customs offices would have had to be ope ned on the Norwegian side of the border.   
• 100 new customs officers would have had to be employed.   
• NOK 100 million (16 million USD, approximately) in  additional costs for the customs authorities 
for new buildings, salaries etc (50% of these cost would be a one time investment and 50% would be an annual cost).   
• NOK 250 million (39 million USD, approximately) a dditional costs for the economic operators, 
mainly due to longer waiting time and double stops at the border (annual costs).   
 
                                                     
 
4Agreement on customs cooperation between the European Community and the Kingdom of Norway , 
see EC Official Journal L 105, 233/04/1997 p. 0017 – 0020.   TN/TF/W/48 
Page 4  
 
 VI. CUSTOMS COOPERATION AT A NORDIC LEVEL 
11. Another forum for cooperation is the Nordic  Administrative Customs Council which is a 
meeting place for the Directors General of Customs of the Nordic countries, i.e., Denmark, Finland, 
Iceland, Norway and Sweden, and the Faeroe Islands. 
12. The Directors General of the five Nordic countri es and the Faeroe Islands meet once a year to 
discuss matters of common interest and to inform each other of developments and plans for the future.   
VII. CONCLUSION 
13. We hope the above information will be useful to Members and stimulate further thinking in 
the area of border cooperation. 
 
__________