Bosnia and Herzegovina vs Serbia: Paying taxes: Payments per year (number per year) - Score
Bosnia and Herzegovina
50
in 2019
Serbia
50
in 2019
Bosnia and Herzegovina rank
131st
Serbia rank
131st
Paying taxes: Payments per year (number per year) - Score over time
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Serbia
How they compare
Bosnia and Herzegovina currently reports 50 against 50 in Serbia, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 131st and Serbia ranks 131st of 191 countries.
Bosnia and Herzegovina has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Serbia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 13.33 | 0 | 13.33 | Bosnia and Herzegovina |
| 2010s | 35.5 | 23.5 | 12 | Bosnia and Herzegovina |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher paying taxes: payments per year (number per year) - score, Bosnia and Herzegovina or Serbia?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina, at 50 against 50 in Serbia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in paying taxes: payments per year (number per year) - score between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia?
- 0, with Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia rank globally for paying taxes: payments per year (number per year) - score?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 131st and Serbia ranks 131st of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Paying taxes: Payments per year (number per year) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for tax payments benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score is indicated on a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance.