Bangladesh vs Bosnia and Herzegovina: Paying taxes: Time (hours per year) - Score
Paying taxes: Time (hours per year) - Score over time
- Bangladesh
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
How they compare
Bosnia and Herzegovina currently reports 44.05 against 40.34 in Bangladesh, a difference of 3.71.
That makes Bosnia and Herzegovina's figure about 1.1 times Bangladesh's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
Bangladesh ranks 178th and Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 175th of 191 countries.
Bosnia and Herzegovina has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bangladesh | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 33.26 | 47.17 | 13.91 | Bosnia and Herzegovina |
| 2010s | 41.55 | 43.76 | 2.21 | Bosnia and Herzegovina |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score, Bangladesh or Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina, at 44.05 against 40.34 in Bangladesh as of 2019.
- What is the difference in paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score between Bangladesh and Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- 3.71, with Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bangladesh and Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Bangladesh and Bosnia and Herzegovina rank globally for paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score?
- Bangladesh ranks 178th and Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 175th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Paying taxes: Time (hours 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 time to comply with tax laws 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.