Kazakhstan, Republic of vs Taiwan Province of China: Trading across borders: Time to import: Documentary compliance
Kazakhstan, Republic of
98.12
in 2019
Taiwan Province of China
98.74
in 2019
Kazakhstan, Republic of rank
54th
Taiwan Province of China rank
51st
Trading across borders: Time to import: Documentary compliance over time
- Kazakhstan, Republic of
- Taiwan Province of China
How they compare
Taiwan Province of China currently reports 98.74 against 98.12 in Kazakhstan, Republic of, a difference of 0.62.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Taiwan Province of China has been ahead every year.
Kazakhstan, Republic of ranks 54th and Taiwan Province of China ranks 51st of 190 countries.
Taiwan Province of China has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: time to import: documentary compliance, Kazakhstan, Republic of or Taiwan Province of China?
- Taiwan Province of China, at 98.74 against 98.12 in Kazakhstan, Republic of as of 2019.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import: documentary compliance between Kazakhstan, Republic of and Taiwan Province of China?
- 0.62, with Taiwan Province of China ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Kazakhstan, Republic of and Taiwan Province of China?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Kazakhstan, Republic of and Taiwan Province of China rank globally for trading across borders: time to import: documentary compliance?
- Kazakhstan, Republic of ranks 54th and Taiwan Province of China ranks 51st of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Time to import: Documentary compliance (hours) (DB16-20 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 the time for documentary compliance to import benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score ranges 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 DB16-20 studies.