This article compares general measures against tax avoidance and the design of general anti-avoidance rules (GAARs) in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. It focuses on aspects such as tax benefits, tax purposes, economic substance, and breaches of legislative purpose. The article also examines potential compliance issues between national GAARs, tax treaties, and the European Union’s Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive (ATAD). The analysis highlights variations in how the national GAARs apply economic substance considerations and the level of pragmatism allowed when assessing conflicts with the purpose of the circumvented legislation. Additionally, it shows that differences in the wording of the GAARs, such as requirements related to tax purposes, do not necessarily result in practical differences due to other GAAR elements reducing or nullifying them. For similar reasons, the authors conclude that compliance issues between the national GAARs and the ATAD GAAR’s requirements are unlikely, despite some differences in wording. Whilst focusing on the Nordic region, the article offers insights relevant to broader international contexts, as the diverse approaches, distinctions and issues identified mirror tax developments worldwide.