Papua New Guinea vs Trinidad and Tobago: Paying taxes: Time (hours per year) - Score
Papua New Guinea
75.58
in 2019
Trinidad and Tobago
75.12
in 2019
Papua New Guinea rank
103rd
Trinidad and Tobago rank
105th
Paying taxes: Time (hours per year) - Score over time
- Papua New Guinea
- Trinidad and Tobago
How they compare
Papua New Guinea currently reports 75.58 against 75.12 in Trinidad and Tobago, a difference of 0.46.
Across all 15 years both countries report, Papua New Guinea has been ahead every year.
Papua New Guinea ranks 103rd and Trinidad and Tobago ranks 105th of 191 countries.
Papua New Guinea has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Papua New Guinea | Trinidad and Tobago | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 76.55 | 75.12 | 1.44 | Papua New Guinea |
| 2010s | 76.07 | 75.12 | 0.9583 | Papua New Guinea |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score, Papua New Guinea or Trinidad and Tobago?
- Papua New Guinea, at 75.58 against 75.12 in Trinidad and Tobago as of 2019.
- What is the difference in paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score between Papua New Guinea and Trinidad and Tobago?
- 0.46, with Papua New Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Papua New Guinea and Trinidad and Tobago?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Papua New Guinea and Trinidad and Tobago rank globally for paying taxes: time (hours per year) - score?
- Papua New Guinea ranks 103rd and Trinidad and Tobago ranks 105th 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.