Guatemala vs Lao People's Democratic Republic: Paying taxes: Time to comply with corporate income tax correction
Guatemala
75.23
in 2019
Lao People's Democratic Republic
73.39
in 2019
Guatemala rank
129th
Lao People's Democratic Republic rank
132nd
Paying taxes: Time to comply with corporate income tax correction over time
- Guatemala
- Lao People's Democratic Republic
How they compare
Guatemala currently reports 75.23 against 73.39 in Lao People's Democratic Republic, a difference of 1.84.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Guatemala has been ahead every year.
Guatemala ranks 129th and Lao People's Democratic Republic ranks 132nd of 182 countries.
Guatemala has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher paying taxes: time to comply with corporate income tax correction, Guatemala or Lao People's Democratic Republic?
- Guatemala, at 75.23 against 73.39 in Lao People's Democratic Republic as of 2019.
- What is the difference in paying taxes: time to comply with corporate income tax correction between Guatemala and Lao People's Democratic Republic?
- 1.84, with Guatemala ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Guatemala and Lao People's Democratic Republic?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
- How do Guatemala and Lao People's Democratic Republic rank globally for paying taxes: time to comply with corporate income tax correction?
- Guatemala ranks 129th and Lao People's Democratic Republic ranks 132nd of 182 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Paying taxes: Time to comply with corporate income tax correction (hours) (DB17-20 methodology) - 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 a corporate income tax correction 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, and is computed based on the methodology in the DB17-20 studies.