Micronesia, Federated States of vs Myanmar: CPIA efficiency of revenue mobilization rating
CPIA efficiency of revenue mobilization rating over time
- Micronesia, Federated States of
- Myanmar
How they compare
Micronesia, Federated States of currently reports 2.5 1=low to 6=high against 2.5 1=low to 6=high in Myanmar, a difference of 0 1=low to 6=high.
Across all 13 years both countries report, Myanmar has been ahead every year.
Micronesia, Federated States of ranks 68th and Myanmar ranks 68th of 85 countries.
Myanmar has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Micronesia, Federated States of | Myanmar | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 2.93 1=low to 6=high | 3.36 1=low to 6=high | 0.4286 1=low to 6=high | Myanmar |
| 2020s | 2.5 1=low to 6=high | 2.75 1=low to 6=high | 0.25 1=low to 6=high | Myanmar |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher cpia efficiency of revenue mobilization rating, Micronesia, Federated States of or Myanmar?
- Micronesia, Federated States of, at 2.5 1=low to 6=high against 2.5 1=low to 6=high in Myanmar as of 2025.
- What is the difference in cpia efficiency of revenue mobilization rating between Micronesia, Federated States of and Myanmar?
- 0 1=low to 6=high, with Micronesia, Federated States of ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Micronesia, Federated States of and Myanmar?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 2013 to 2025.
- How do Micronesia, Federated States of and Myanmar rank globally for cpia efficiency of revenue mobilization rating?
- Micronesia, Federated States of ranks 68th and Myanmar ranks 68th of 85 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- CPIA database, World Bank Group (WBG), published as CPIA efficiency of revenue mobilization rating (1=low to 6=high). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Country Policy and Institutional Assessment (CPIA) measures the extent to which a country’s policy and institutional framework supports sustainable growth and poverty reduction, and consequently the effective use of development assistance. The outcome of the exercise yields both an overall score and scores for sixteen criteria that compose the CPIA. These criteria include: A. Economic Management (1. Monetary and Exchange Rate Policies; 2. Fiscal Policy; 3. Debt Policy and Management), B. Structural Policies (4. Trade; 5. Financial Sector; 6. Business Regulatory Environment), C. Policies for Social Inclusion/Equity (7. Gender equality; 8. Equity of public resource use; 9. Building human resources; 10. Social protection and labor; 11. Policies and institutions for environmental sustainability), D. Public Sector Management and Institutions (12. Property rights and rule-based governance; 13. Quality of budgetary and financial management; 14. Efficiency of revenue mobilization; 15. Quality of public administration; 16. Transparency, accountability, and corruption in the public sector). This Efficiency of Revenue Mobilization criterion assesses the overall pattern of revenue mobilization, not only the tax structure as it exists on paper, but revenue from all sources as they are collected. Separate sub-ratings are provided for (a) tax policy and (b) tax administration.