Is trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 rising or falling in Uruguay?

Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.

Where does this Uruguay data come from?

The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border compliance (USD) (DB16 in Uruguay

Name: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border compliance (USD) (DB16 in Uruguay
Creator: World Bank
License: CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)

Uruguay: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border compliance (USD) (DB16 was 58.33 in 2019. ▬ Flat

Latest (2019)

58.33

Change on year

unchanged

World rank

116th

of 188 countries

All-time high

58.33

in 2014

All-time low

58.33

in 2014

Years of data

2014–2019

Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border compliance (USD) (DB16 in Uruguay, 2014–2019

Source: World Bank.

Analysis

The most recent figure for trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 in Uruguay is 58.33, measured in 2019. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.

Compared with earlier readings it is unchanged over ten years.

Uruguay ranks 116th of 188 countries on this measure, in the middle of the range.

Countries ranked near Uruguay

113 Honduras 59.77 compare
114 Panama 59.17 compare
115 Kyrgyzstan 58.41 compare
116 Costa Rica 58.33 compare
116 Paraguay 58.33 compare
119 Russia 56.67 compare

See the full ranking of 190 places →

More reference data data for Uruguay

Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 0.2999 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 4.87 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 6.98 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 0.3685 (2050)
Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 6.98 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure applied to Soils 1.01 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure Management 0.2195 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Manure left on Pasture 24.48 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - IPCC Agriculture 33.62 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (N2O) - Crop Residues 2.01 (2050)

All data for Uruguay →

Frequently asked questions

What is trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 in Uruguay?: Trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 in Uruguay was 58.33 in 2019, according to the World Bank.
What is the highest trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 recorded in Uruguay?: The highest recorded value was 58.33 in 2014.
What is the lowest trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 recorded in Uruguay?: The lowest recorded value was 58.33 in 2014.
How does Uruguay rank for trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16?: Uruguay ranks 116th out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
Is trading across borders: cost to import: border compliance (usd) (db16 rising or falling in Uruguay?: Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this Uruguay data come from?: The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Download this data

CSV · JSON — 6 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

About this data

Indicator: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Border compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score
Source: World Bank
Licence: CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage: 190 places, 1,139 data points, 2014–2019
Last refreshed: 10 August 2026

The score for the cost for border 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.