Iran, Islamic Republic of vs Papua New Guinea: Paying taxes: Time to obtain VAT refund (weeks) (DB17-20 methodology)
Iran, Islamic Republic of
31.85
in 2019
Papua New Guinea
30.57
in 2019
Iran, Islamic Republic of rank
80th
Papua New Guinea rank
81st
Paying taxes: Time to obtain VAT refund (weeks) (DB17-20 methodology) over time
- Iran, Islamic Republic of
- Papua New Guinea
How they compare
Iran, Islamic Republic of currently reports 31.85 against 30.57 in Papua New Guinea, a difference of 1.28.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Iran, Islamic Republic of has been ahead every year.
Iran, Islamic Republic of ranks 80th and Papua New Guinea ranks 81st of 157 countries.
Iran, Islamic Republic of has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher paying taxes: time to obtain vat refund (weeks) (db17-20 methodology), Iran, Islamic Republic of or Papua New Guinea?
- Iran, Islamic Republic of, at 31.85 against 30.57 in Papua New Guinea as of 2019.
- What is the difference in paying taxes: time to obtain vat refund (weeks) (db17-20 methodology) between Iran, Islamic Republic of and Papua New Guinea?
- 1.28, with Iran, Islamic Republic of ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Iran, Islamic Republic of and Papua New Guinea?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2019.
- How do Iran, Islamic Republic of and Papua New Guinea rank globally for paying taxes: time to obtain vat refund (weeks) (db17-20 methodology)?
- Iran, Islamic Republic of ranks 80th and Papua New Guinea ranks 81st of 157 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Paying taxes: Time to obtain VAT refund (weeks) (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 obtain VAT refund 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.