A list of trade agreements with the EU and its Member States, as well as brief explanations, can be found at: EU Trade Agreement Norway`s total financial contribution in the context of the EEA Agreement consists of contributions related to participation in these projects and a part for development projects aimed at reducing social and economic disparities in the EU (EEA grants and Norway).   EEA EFTA States finance their participation in programmes and agencies at the relative size of their gross domestic product (GDP) in relation to the GDP of the EEA as a whole. Participation in EEA EFTA is therefore on an equal footing with the EU Member States. The total commitment of eea EFTA amounts to 2.4% of the total EU programme budget. In 2008, Norway`s contribution amounted to €188 million. Throughout the 2007-2013 programming period, the Norwegian contribution will be significantly increased from €130 million in 2007 to €290 million in 2013, in line with the evolution of the EU programme budget. For EEA and Norwegian subsidies from 2004 to 2009, Norway provided almost €1.3 billion.   An important issue for Norway concerns its fisheries resources, which constitute an important part of the economy and would fall under the Common Fisheries Policy if Norway joined the EU. Norway has a high per capita GNP and is expected to pay a high contribution. The country has a limited amount of agriculture and few underdeveloped areas, meaning Norway would receive little economic support from the EU. However, from 2009 onwards, Norway has opted for many EU projects and, given that its overall financial contribution under the EEA Agreement consists of contributions linked to participation in these projects and part provided to development projects aimed at reducing social and economic disparities in the EU (EEA and Norwegian grants)  , their participation is on an equal footing with that of the EU Member States. The total commitment of eea EFTA amounts to 2.4% of the total EU programme budget.
Switzerland has a little more distant relations with the EU. Its agreement is based on around 120 separate bilateral agreements, many of which began to be negotiated by Switzerland after rejecting EEA membership in 1992. “Norway” has been floated as a possible “plan B” for Brexit as the British Parliament rejects the draft agreement signed by the EU and the UK. It is envisaged because Norway`s relations are as close as a country can accede to the European Union without actually being a member of it. It could also serve as a model for maintaining trade relations as close as they are now. It`s also useful because it`s an existing standard model and it`s seen as a kind of soft Brexit that could easily be used to avoid a messy no-deal scenario if, as expected, the UK Parliament rejects the draft divorce deal. The intention to move in this direction could be expressed in the political declaration of the UK and the EU, the document that will set out the two sides on their future relationship. Norway and other members of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) – Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland – have jointly concluded 30 free trade agreements since the early 1990s. These include Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Central American countries (Costa Rica, Guatemala and Panama), Ecuador, Egypt, Georgia, Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), Hong Kong – China, Indonesia, Israel, Jordan, Republic of Korea, Lebanon, Macedonia, Mercosur, Mexico, Montenegro, Morocco, North Macedonia, the Palestinian Authority, Peru, the Philippines, Serbia, Singapore, the South African Customs Union, Tunisia, Turkey and Ukraine. The agreements cover trade in goods and services, services and investment, dispute settlement and other issues generally addressed in bilateral investment treaties. There is a growing belief that something like the Norwegian model would win a majority of MPs and break the deadlock in parliament. Here`s what the Norwegian model would actually mean in practice.
The new agreement builds on the renewal agreement that the UK signed before leaving the EU economic zone, and the government stresses that it contains important elements of digital trade that go beyond what the EU has. Accordingly, the EEA Agreement provides for a high level of economic integration, common competition rules, State aid rules and public procurement. The UK has more control over its borders than Norway, which is part of the borderless Schengen area. As a result, Norway has higher per capita immigration than the UK. However, as a signatory to the agreement, he has a say in the operation of the agreement. Under the plan, led by MPs such as Conservative Nick Boles and Stephen Kinnock of the Labour Party – which would be backed by several high-ranking members of the cabinet – the UK would copy Norway`s relationship with the EU after Brexit, either temporarily until a new free trade agreement with the EU is ready, or permanently. The EEA Agreement grants Norway access to the EU`s internal market. Of the 23,000 EU laws currently in force, the EEA has around 5,000 (in force), meaning that Norway is subject to around 21% of EU law.
According to Norwegian foreign policy (NOU 2012: 2 pp. 790, 795), among the legal acts transposed from 1994 to 2010, 70% of EU directives and 17% of EU regulations in force in the EU in 2008 were in force in Norway in 2010.  [Need a quote to verify] Overall, this means that in 2008, around 28% of the EU legislation in force in Norway in 2008 was in force. While the Norwegian parliament must pass all new laws that have “important new obligations”, this has been widely supported and is generally undisputed; Between 1992 and 2011, 92% of EU legislation was adopted unanimously, most of the rest by a large majority.  Norway`s economic and trade relations with the EU are mainly governed by the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA). Lol Further measures would be needed as Norway is not in the customs union. To resolve the controversial issue of avoiding a hard border in Ireland, the UK should also agree on a customs deal with the EU. This means that the UK should have a so-called “Norway plus” solution.
This could limit its ability to negotiate its own trade agreements. Norway has a large fishing and agriculture industry and forms its own policy in these sectors by remaining outside the EU`s Common Fisheries Policy or Common Agricultural Policy. A similar arrangement for the UK would please London, as it would be able to set its own policy in these important sectors. Norway can negotiate trade agreements with other countries in the world, which would appeal to pro-Brexit advocates, and it has concluded such agreements as a group with other EFTA countries. A Norwegian-style deal would mean the UK would not be governed by the European Court of Justice, another red issue for Brexiteers. The deal will boost trade between the four non-EU countries, which already amounts to £21.6 billion, British Minister Liz Truss said. Disagreements on this issue are known to lead to divisions within families and local communities. Although there is a general trend that urban communities prefer membership and rural communities do not, there have been noisy minorities in all regions of Norway.
“Before the UK left the EU, Norway enjoyed the free movement of goods, services, capital and people to the UK through the EEA Agreement,” Norway said. Vedum stood firm. “This is classic alarmism,” he said. “We will always have a deal with the EU, a better deal.” He was ruled out because he didn`t tick Theresa May`s box for the kind of Brexit she wants: she promised to take the UK out of the single market and customs union. British MPs are circulating the idea of a Norwegian-style short-term deal, including some form of temporary customs union with the EU, as a kind of remain-of-business deal until the UK and eu reach their own trade deal, and to avoid a chaotic no-deal scenario if the current draft deal is rejected by Parliament. However, it is not clear whether other EEA members or the EU would consider such a temporary solution or what could be negotiated before the UK`s withdrawal date. Norway`s agreement – the Agreement on the European Economic Area – has allowed the country to retain greater control over important parts of its economy, particularly its fishing grounds, but has forced it to pursue large parts of EU policy over which it has no say as a non-member. Currently, parties that support or oppose EU membership can be found in right-wing and left-wing coalitions: as a result, most governments contain pro- and anti-EU elements. To avoid further debates on EU membership, anti-EU parties typically require “suicide paragraphs” in government coalition agreements, meaning that when a coalition party officially starts a new debate on the EU, the government will fall. This was true of both the previous centre-right Bondevik government and the centre-left Stoltenberg government. .