Statizoid

Time to import: Border compliance (hours) (DB16-20 methodology) by country

The time for border compliance to import records the time associated with compliance with the economy’s customs regulations and with regulations relating to other inspections that are mandatory in order for the import shipment to cross the economy’s border, as well as the time and cost for handling that takes place...

Countries reporting
169
Highest
402 DB16-20 methodology
Tanzania
Lowest
0.1444 DB16-20 methodology
Croatia
Median
61.33 DB16-20 methodology
Years covered
6
2014–2019
Data points
1,132

What the numbers show

Time to import: Border compliance (hours) (DB16-20 methodology) is currently reported for 169 countries. The highest value is 402 DB16-20 methodology in Tanzania; the lowest is 0.1444 DB16-20 methodology in Croatia.

The median across all reporting countries is 61.33 DB16-20 methodology, and the mean is 75.92 DB16-20 methodology.

The gap between the highest and lowest reporting country is a factor of about 2,783.

Over the past decade 13 countries rose and 54 fell. The largest increase was in Zimbabwe (up 281.6%), and the largest decrease in Armenia (down 95.0%).

Time to import: Border compliance (hours): full country ranking

#Country LatestYear 10-year changeTrend
1 Tanzania 402 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
2 Congo 397.33 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
3 Democratic Republic of Congo 336 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 20.0% falling
4 Cameroon 271 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
5 Chad 242 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
6 Nigeria 241.71 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 14.8% falling
7 Egypt 240 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 100.0% rising
7 Equatorial Guinea 240 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
7 Venezuela 240 DB16-20 methodology 2018 — flat
10 Myanmar 230 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 91.7% rising
11 Zimbabwe 227.67 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 281.6% rising
12 Liberia 217 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
13 Bangladesh 216 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
14 Algeria 209.57 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 36.0% falling
15 Kenya 194 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 7.8% rising
16 Lebanon 180 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
17 South Sudan 179 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
18 Togo 168 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 37.0% falling
19 Burundi 154.3 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
20 Sao Tome and Principe 150 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 8.0% falling
21 Uganda 145 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 6.0% falling
22 Sudan 144 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
23 Syria 141.33 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
24 Iran 141 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 4.5% falling
25 Iraq 130.67 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
26 Vanuatu 126 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 36.4% falling
27 Cote d'Ivoire 125.14 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
28 Central African Republic 121.71 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
29 Pakistan 120 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 8.6% falling
29 Philippines 120 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 66.7% rising
29 Sierra Leone 120 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 10.3% falling
29 Zambia 120 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 48.1% flat
33 Djibouti 118 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
34 Bolivia 114 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
35 Colombia 112 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
36 Uzbekistan 110.61 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
37 Solomon Islands 108 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
38 Tajikistan 106.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 39.8% falling
39 Burkina Faso 102 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
40 Maldives 100 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
40 East Timor 100 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
42 Indonesia 99.36 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
43 Madagascar 98.73 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 23.3% falling
44 Mali 98.33 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 6.6% falling
45 Seychelles 97 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 2.0% flat
46 Afghanistan 96 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
46 Honduras 96 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 71.4% rising
46 Kiribati 96 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
49 Gambia 87 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
49 South Africa 87 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
51 Somalia 85 DB16-20 methodology 2019 — flat
52 Gabon 84 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
52 Guinea-Bissau 84 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
52 Guyana 84 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
52 Marshall Islands 84 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
52 Palau 84 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
52 Samoa 84 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
58 Haiti 83 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 8.8% falling
59 Benin 82 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 46.8% falling
60 Barbados 81 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 22.1% falling
61 Costa Rica 80 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
61 Ghana 80 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 10.5% falling
61 Jamaica 80 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
61 Tunisia 80 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 37.5% falling
65 Guinea 78.86 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 13.2% falling
65 Jordan 78.86 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
65 Libya 78.86 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
68 Niger 78 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged falling
68 Trinidad and Tobago 78 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
70 Rwanda 73.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 237.2% volatile
71 Ethiopia 72.23 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 33.8% falling
72 Angola 72 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 73.9% volatile
72 Guatemala 72 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 25.0% falling
72 Kuwait 72 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 19.5% falling
72 Sri Lanka 72 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
72 Nicaragua 72 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
72 Peru 72 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
72 Papua New Guinea 72 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
72 Saudi Arabia 72 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 68.4% falling
80 Comoros 70.27 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
81 Mauritania 69 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 45.2% falling
82 Kyrgyzstan 68.91 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 4.3% flat
83 India 65.3 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 77.3% falling
84 Israel 64 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
85 Antigua and Barbuda 61.33 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
86 Argentina 60 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
86 Cape Verde 60 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
88 Morocco 57 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 56.7% falling
89 Micronesia (country) 56 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
89 Vietnam 56 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 12.5% falling
91 Malawi 55.04 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 13.6% falling
92 United Arab Emirates 54 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
92 Chile 54 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
94 Senegal 53.33 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
95 Bahamas 51 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 48.5% falling
96 Thailand 50.18 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
97 Brunei 48 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
97 Mongolia 48 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
97 Puerto Rico 48 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
97 Qatar 48 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 60.4% falling
97 Suriname 48 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 33.3% falling
97 Saint Vincent and the Grenadines 48 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
103 Taiwan 47.38 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
104 Mexico 44.22 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
105 Bahrain 42 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 22.2% falling
106 Mauritius 41 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 19.6% falling
107 Japan 39.6 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
108 Dominica 39.27 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
109 Australia 39 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 5.4% flat
109 Oman 39 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 58.6% falling
111 Grenada 37.33 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
112 Saint Kitts and Nevis 37.14 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
113 Malaysia 36 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 50.0% falling
113 El Salvador 36 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 129.8% rising
115 China 35.65 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 61.4% falling
116 Fiji 34.75 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 17.3% falling
117 Singapore 33 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 6.9% falling
118 Ukraine 32 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
119 Belize 30 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 37.5% falling
119 Brazil 30 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 41.3% falling
119 Russia 30 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 22.3% falling
122 Saint Lucia 26.57 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
123 Tonga 25.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
124 New Zealand 25 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
125 Dominican Republic 24 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
125 Ecuador 24 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
125 Ireland 24 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
125 Iceland 24 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
125 Panama 24 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
125 Paraguay 24 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 50.0% falling
131 Montenegro 23.22 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
132 Hong Kong 18.55 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
133 Georgia 15 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
134 Cyprus 14.67 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
135 Nepal 11 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 82.5% falling
136 Laos 10.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 22.2% falling
137 Albania 10 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 11.1% rising
138 Mozambique 9 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 35.7% falling
139 Cambodia 7.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
139 North Macedonia 7.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
141 Turkey 6.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 79.4% falling
142 South Korea 6 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
142 Palestine 6 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
142 Uruguay 6 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 53.8% falling
145 Bosnia and Herzegovina 5.95 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
146 Namibia 5.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
146 Kosovo 5.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
146 Kosovo (UNSCR 1244) 5.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
149 Bhutan 5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
150 Serbia 4.6 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 15.0% rising
151 Lesotho 4.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
152 Moldova 4.39 DB16-20 methodology 2019 up 51.9% rising
153 Azerbaijan 4.14 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 87.2% falling
154 San Marino 4 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
155 Botswana 3.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 20.9% falling
156 Eswatini 3.06 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 33.7% falling
157 United Kingdom 3 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
158 Armenia 2.54 DB16-20 methodology 2019 down 95.0% volatile
159 Canada 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
159 Finland 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
159 Kazakhstan 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
159 Norway 2 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
163 Malta 1.56 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
164 United States 1.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
165 Switzerland 1 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
166 Bulgaria 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
166 Greece 0.5 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
168 Romania 0.375 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat
169 Croatia 0.1444 DB16-20 methodology 2019 unchanged flat

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Time to import: Border compliance (hours) by country. Statizoid. Retrieved 24 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/stat/time-to-import-border-compliance-hours-db16-20-methodology/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/stat/time-to-import-border-compliance-hours-db16-20-methodology/">Time to import: Border compliance (hours) by country</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Time to import: Border compliance (hours) (DB16-20 methodology)
Unit
DB16-20 methodology
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
189 places, 1,132 data points, 2014–2019
Last refreshed

The time for border compliance to import records the time associated with compliance with the economy’s customs regulations and with regulations relating to other inspections that are mandatory in order for the import 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 calculate in hours. The time for this segment includes time for customs clearance and inspection procedures conducted by other agencies. If all customs clearance and other inspections take place at the port or border at the same time, the time estimate for border compliance takes this simultaneity into account. The component indicator is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.