What if EFTA work?

EFTA was established on 3 May 1960 as a trade bloc-alternative for European states who were either unable to, or chose not to, join the then-European Economic Community (EEC) which has now become the EU. The Stockholm Convention, establishing EFTA, was signed on 4 January 1960 in Stockholm by seven countries.
British reaction to the creation of the EEC was mixed and complex. Consequently, in 1960 (after the creation of EFTA), France vetoed British membership. Britain was also preoccupied with the Commonwealth, which was in a critical period.
The UK brought together several countries (including some bordering the EEC) and decided to form the European Free Trade Association in about 1959, soon after the establishment of the 6-nation EEC (France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands; these last three are also known as the Benelux Union).
On 4 January 1960, the Treaty on European Free Trade Association was initialed in the Golden Hall of the Prince's Palace of Stockholm. This established the progressive elimination of customs duties on industrial products, but did not affect agricultural products or maritime trade.
The main difference between the early EEC and the EFTA was the absence of a common external customs tariff, and therefore each EFTA member was free to establish individual customs duties against trade with non EFTA countries.
Despite this modest initiative, the financial results were excellent, as it stimulated an increase of foreign trade volume among its members from 3.5 to 8.2 billion US dollars between 1959 and 1967. This was, however, rather less than the increase enjoyed by countries inside the EEC.
After the accession of Denmark and the UK to the EEC, EFTA began to falter. For this reason most countries eased or eliminated their trade tariffs in preparation to join the EEC, but experienced declining revenue which reduced the importance of EFTA. Currently there are only 4 members remaining: Switzerland, Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland. Iceland applied for EU membership in 2009 following the 2008–2011 Icelandic financial crisis.

But what if EFTA was a complete success?
Which others nations could join to EFTA (is possible Canada and Australia,though extra-european)?
And how an EFTA success can change EU (maybe remains EEC,and not adopt Euro)?
 
Do you mean EFTA "beating" the EEC/EU in terms of becoming the paramount trans-European community? I don' think it is possible.

EFTA only had 1 large economy in it, Britain's. Every other country was much smaller. The EEC, however, had all the other major economies - West Germany, France, and Italy plus the Benelux. Its collective economy was just so much bigger than EFTA.

After the Commonwealth countries adopted their own trade policies, Britain really needed access to the EEC trade bloc to make up for lost markets. That's why it choose to leave EFTA and enter the EEC instead. Once the UK left EFTA, the economic benefits were very small for its other members and the EEC became the only real game in town.

This is pretty much inevitable. The only way EFTA could become greater than the EEC is if we completely change the circumstances the two blocs are in. We would need a situation where the UK economy is so dynamic that EEC countries would want in. That would require 2 decades worth of economic change between UK and continental Europe.

Or perhaps UK is an early member of the European Coal & Steel Community, and is able to dominate the early EEC and do EFTA on the side so that eventually EEC countries adopt EFTA for economic integration.

Both Canada and Australia had economies that were diverging from the old Empire. The US had always dominated the Canadian economy and become very important to Australia since WWII. Those countries had different economic priorities than Britain. Certainly none of the other EFTA or European countries had much trade with those countries. Their membership is not as attractive as being in the same market as a combined France-Germany-Italy-Benelux market which is large and close by.

Britain's problem was that it was slow to realize the extent of the world changing. It didn't realize soon enough that the Empire was doomed and that its future lay in Europe. The Suez Crisis split France from Britain in 1956, convincing the French its future laid with a French-German tandem lead by Paris.

The only way I see a dominant EFTA is if Britain very early on pushed EFTA after World War II and made it a prime component of a Franco-British Partnership and phased out imperial preferences (a reluctance to do this is probably the single greatest cause why Britain could never do this). There could still be a ECSC, but any greater partnership would be stillborn within a greater EFTA covering Britain, France, Benelux and Scandinavia. Later Italy would join followed soon by Ireland and later West Germany. Probably something like the EU would eventually follow, but Britain would have had a far greater influence in determining how such a union would work, its limits, and its influence within it.

1960 is simply too late a POD for EFTA to dominate.
 
Besides which, EFTA was an add-on to the EEC, IIRC. Basically they had to live by (many) EEC rules without having any say in the forming of them.

I suppose you could have a bigger EFTA that managed to get negotiations on some of the rules you didn't like, but I don't see any way to do what you asked.
 
Top