Estonia vs Chinese Taipei: Enforcing contracts: Cost
Enforcing contracts: Cost over time
- Estonia
- Chinese Taipei
How they compare
Chinese Taipei currently reports 18.3% against 17.3% in Estonia, a difference of 1.0%.
That makes Chinese Taipei's figure about 1.1 times Estonia's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 17 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Chinese Taipei ahead.
Estonia ranks 167th and Chinese Taipei ranks 164th of 190 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Estonia averaged higher in 1 and Chinese Taipei in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Estonia | Chinese Taipei | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 17.7% | 18.3% | 0.6% | Chinese Taipei |
| 2010s | 20.0% | 18.3% | 1.7% | Estonia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher enforcing contracts: cost, Estonia or Chinese Taipei?
- Chinese Taipei, at 18.3% against 17.3% in Estonia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in enforcing contracts: cost between Estonia and Chinese Taipei?
- 1.0%, with Chinese Taipei ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Estonia and Chinese Taipei?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2019.
- How do Estonia and Chinese Taipei rank globally for enforcing contracts: cost?
- Estonia ranks 167th and Chinese Taipei ranks 164th of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Enforcing contracts: Cost (% of claim). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The cost to enforce contracts is recorded as a percentage of the claim value, assumed to be equivalent to 200% of income per capita or $5,000, whichever is greater. Three types of costs are recorded: average attorney fees, court costs and enforcement costs. Bribes are not taken into account.