Never had the problem. States are normally far more interested in CofRs, Insurance and credit card numbers. :)
Hmm, looking into the referred to ICAO paragraphs is a bit interesting regarding private flying, in particular 1.2.2.3;
1.2.2 Method of rendering a licence valid
1.2.2.1 When a Contracting State renders valid a licence issued by another Contracting State, as an alternative to the
issuance of its own licence, it shall establish validity by suitable authorization to be carried with the former licence accepting it
as the equivalent of the latter. When a State limits the authorization to specific privileges, the authorization shall specify the
privileges of the licence which are to be accepted as its equivalent. The validity of the authorization shall not extend beyond the
period of validity of the licence. The authorization ceases to be valid if the licence upon which it was issued is revoked or
suspended.
Note.— This provision is not intended to preclude the State that issued the licence from extending, by a suitable notification,
the period of validity of the licence without necessarily requiring either the physical return of the licence or the appearance of
the licence holder before the Authorities of that State.
1.2.2.2 When an authorization under 1.2.2.1 is issued for use in commercial air transport operations, the Licensing
Authority shall confirm the validity of the other Contracting State’s licence before issuing the authorization.
1.2.2.3 Recommendation.— A pilot licence issued by a Contracting State should be rendered valid by other
Contracting States for use in private flights.
Note.— Contracting States which, without formality, render valid a licence issued by another Contracting State for use in
private flights are encouraged to notify this facility in their Aeronautical Information Publications.
Yes, the bit
A pilot licence issued by a Contracting State should be rendered valid by other Contracting States for use in private flights.
has been ignored by 97.345% of countries 
Remember that phrase implies validating any ICAO PPL/IR, not just a PPL. A very hot potato!
But nevertheless, I had no idea that this is de facto consensus of the ICAO.
I also looked at the AIP of Norway and Sweden about differences from ICAO (chapter 1.7). About Annex 1, Norway has “NIL” Sweden one the other hand has a reference to 1.2.2.1 where is say:
Member State of the European Union is recognised by all the other Member States without further technical requirements or evaluation
Now, this is a bit semantical, but the phrase “Member State of the European Union” is very precise and very different from the usual phrase used by EASA (member state). I cannot understand that Norway is included here. Likewise, according to the law, anyone flying a Norwegian aircraft internationally, has to have a license issued by the Norwegian AA, or one that is approved (there is no mention of any “automatic” or implicit procedure regarding this approval of any other license). Also, this ramp check paper only lists up actual “Member State of the European Union”, not member states of EASA.
I had no idea that this is de facto consensus of the ICAO.
Yes, but it was never implemented by anybody AFAIK because e.g. it would demolish most national flight training, with everybody who has time and 2 cents going off to the USA and doing their whole PPL or PPL/IR out there… that could never be allowed 
Even with the TSA and visa hassle, the US route is way cheaper, especially for a young person.
Peter wrote:
Yes, but it was never implemented by anybody AFAIK because e.g. it would demolish most national flight training, with everybody who has time and 2 cents going off to the USA and doing their whole PPL or PPL/IR out there
People did that before, pre EASA/JAR. Converting from FAA PPL was only a matter of getting new papers. What stopped people from going to the US exclusively to take the PPL was the travelling cost. When I got my PPL, I payed NOK 20-25 k (or about € 2-2.5k). At that time a flight ticket on an airline back and forth would cost the same, maybe half if you really did some research (but that wasn’t easy without widespread internet). No one did that unless they lived there for some reason, work typically. Today I can get a ticket for € 0.1k, but the (EASA) PPL costs minimum €10k. It is a very different situation.
So, I had a national license, easily convertible to any other national license anywhere in the world. Then converted to JAR FCL. If I didn’t the authorities said I would be strangled by limitations. Later the JAR FCL was converted to EASA FCL that supposedly was valid throughout EASA-land. But reading this thread and actually looking at the regulations, rules and laws, what can I do with this fancy EASA FCL. Absolutely nothing I couldn’t also do with my national license (fly a Norwegian aircraft around the world). The references and documents in this thread shows with black print that EASA does NOT recognize my Norwegian license (EASA FCL) on equal terms as those from full EU member states. It’s a joke. EASA is a big joke.
That may be true for Norway but EASA FCL did make it easier for e.g. a German with a German issued PPL to rent a PH-reg and fly it. And some of the national validation procedures were buried deep in national law; I recall seeing some fascinating stuff from France which nobody knew about
The biggest thing EASA did, for private pilots, was the IR mutual acceptance, and the CPL/IR etc for commercial pilots.
It was always the case that if you had a PPL or PPL/IR from the same country as the aircraft reg, you could fly worldwide. So perhaps one could say EASA FCL did nothing for the vast majority of cases. And at the same time EASA FCL has gradually screwed the N-reg option which was for many years the preferred route to the IR. So IMHO it has over-promised and under-delivered, for private GA.
Peter wrote:
EASA FCL did make it easier for e.g. a German with a German issued PPL to rent a PH-reg and fly it
I’m sure I can too. These things are laid down in the EEA/EU agreements and whatnot. If it came up in some EU court that would eventually be the result. But as things stand today, I can go to Sweden, rent a plane and risk being stopped and fined and jailed because my license isn’t valid there, as by the current “books”. There is no other way to see this, and it is rather insane.
However, looking at some other AIPs
As for the other states, the AIP is behind a password/pay wall (which is even more insane).
LeSving wrote:
The references and documents in this thread shows with black print that EASA does NOT recognize my Norwegian license (EASA FCL) on equal terms as those from full EU member states.
Which of course begs the question – if applied strictly, what does that mean for all UK/CAA licensed pilots after Brexit?
As discussed previously in various “what happens after brexit” threads, they have ICAO papers and can fly a G-reg worldwide.
What will happen to UK issued license holders after brexit depends on any mutual acceptance agreement afterwards.
