Central African Republic vs Congo: Paying taxes: Time (hours per year) - Score
Central African Republic
32.92
in 2019
Congo
14.53
in 2019
Central African Republic rank
177th
Congo rank
179th
Paying taxes: Time (hours per year) - Score over time
- Central African Republic
- Congo
How they compare
Central African Republic currently reports 32.92 against 14.53 in Congo, a difference of 18.39.
That makes Central African Republic's figure about 2.3 times Congo's.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Central African Republic has been ahead every year.
Central African Republic ranks 177th and Congo ranks 179th of 188 countries.
Central African Republic has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Central African Republic | Congo | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 29.68 | 13.91 | 15.77 | Central African Republic |
| 2010s | 32.27 | 14.34 | 17.93 | Central African Republic |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score, Central African Republic or Congo?
- Central African Republic, at 32.92 against 14.53 in Congo as of 2019.
- What is the difference in paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score between Central African Republic and Congo?
- 18.39, with Central African Republic ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Central African Republic and Congo?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Central African Republic and Congo rank globally for paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score?
- Central African Republic ranks 177th and Congo ranks 179th of 188 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.