Equatorial Guinea vs Gabon: Paying taxes: Time (hours per year) - Score

Equatorial Guinea
31.53
in 2019
Gabon
9.89
in 2019
Equatorial Guinea rank
178th
Gabon rank
181st

Paying taxes: Time (hours per year) - Score over time

  • Equatorial Guinea
  • Gabon
1015202530200520122019

How they compare

Equatorial Guinea currently reports 31.53 against 9.89 in Gabon, a difference of 21.64.

That makes Equatorial Guinea's figure about 3.2 times Gabon's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Gabon ahead.

Equatorial Guinea ranks 178th and Gabon ranks 181st of 188 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Equatorial Guinea averaged higher in 1 and Gabon in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Equatorial Guinea Gabon Difference Ahead
2000s 31.53 32.15 0.6183 Gabon
2010s 31.53 27.7 3.83 Equatorial Guinea

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score, Equatorial Guinea or Gabon?
Equatorial Guinea, at 31.53 against 9.89 in Gabon as of 2019.
What is the difference in paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score between Equatorial Guinea and Gabon?
21.64, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Gabon?
15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
How do Equatorial Guinea and Gabon rank globally for paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score?
Equatorial Guinea ranks 178th and Gabon ranks 181st 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

Indicator
Paying taxes: Time (hours per year) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 2,783 data points, 2005–2019
Last refreshed

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.