Solomon Islands vs Zimbabwe: Paying taxes: Total tax and contribution rate (% of profit) - Score
Solomon Islands
91.7%
in 2019
Zimbabwe
92.3%
in 2019
Solomon Islands rank
61st
Zimbabwe rank
59th
Paying taxes: Total tax and contribution rate (% of profit) - Score over time
- Solomon Islands
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Zimbabwe currently reports 92.3% against 91.7% in Solomon Islands, a difference of 0.6%.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Solomon Islands ahead.
Solomon Islands ranks 61st and Zimbabwe ranks 59th of 191 countries.
Solomon Islands has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Solomon Islands | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 100.0% | 76.0% | 24.0% | Solomon Islands |
| 2010s | 94.2% | 90.5% | 3.6% | Solomon Islands |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher paying taxes: total tax and contribution rate (% of profit) - score, Solomon Islands or Zimbabwe?
- Zimbabwe, at 92.3% against 91.7% in Solomon Islands as of 2019.
- What is the difference in paying taxes: total tax and contribution rate (% of profit) - score between Solomon Islands and Zimbabwe?
- 0.6%, with Zimbabwe ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Solomon Islands and Zimbabwe?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2019.
- How do Solomon Islands and Zimbabwe rank globally for paying taxes: total tax and contribution rate (% of profit) - score?
- Solomon Islands ranks 61st and Zimbabwe ranks 59th of 191 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Paying taxes: Total tax and contribution rate (% of profit) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The score for total tax and contribution rate 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.