Japan vs Oman: Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD)
Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) over time
- Japan
- Oman
How they compare
Oman currently reports 279 DB16-20 methodology against 272.44 DB16-20 methodology in Japan, a difference of 6.56 DB16-20 methodology.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 6 shared years of data; in 2014 it was Japan ahead.
Japan ranks 112th and Oman ranks 110th of 186 countries.
Japan has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd), Japan or Oman?
- Oman, at 279 DB16-20 methodology against 272.44 DB16-20 methodology in Japan as of 2019.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd) between Japan and Oman?
- 6.56 DB16-20 methodology, with Oman ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Japan and Oman?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Japan and Oman rank globally for trading across borders: cost to export: border compliance (usd)?
- Japan ranks 112th and Oman ranks 110th of 186 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Cost to export: Border compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The cost for border compliance to export records the cost associated with compliance with the economy’s customs regulations and with regulations relating to other inspections that are mandatory in order for the export shipment to cross the economy’s border, as well as the time and cost for handling that takes place at its port or border. It is calculated in US dollars. The cost for this segment include the cost for customs clearance and inspection procedures conducted by other agencies. For example, the cost for conducting a phytosanitary inspection would be included here. Informal payments for which no receipt is issued are excluded from the costs recorded. The component indicator is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.