China (People's Republic of) vs Viet Nam: Effective tax rates - Corporate tax statistics — Effective average

China (People's Republic of)
21.15 Percentage of taxable income
in 2025
Viet Nam
15.57 Percentage of taxable income
in 2025
China (People's Republic of) rank
3rd
Viet Nam rank
2nd

Effective tax rates - Corporate tax statistics — Effective average over time

  • China (People's Republic of)
  • Viet Nam
05101520201720212025

How they compare

China (People's Republic of) currently reports 21.15 Percentage of taxable income against 15.57 Percentage of taxable income in Viet Nam, a difference of 5.58 Percentage of taxable income.

That makes China (People's Republic of)'s figure about 1.4 times Viet Nam's.

Across all 9 years both countries report, China (People's Republic of) has been ahead every year.

China (People's Republic of) ranks 3rd and Viet Nam ranks 2nd of 3 groups.

China (People's Republic of) has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade China (People's Republic of) Viet Nam Difference Ahead
2010s 21.94 Percentage of taxable income 15.78 Percentage of taxable income 6.16 Percentage of taxable income China (People's Republic of)
2020s 21.91 Percentage of taxable income 15.97 Percentage of taxable income 5.95 Percentage of taxable income China (People's Republic of)

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher effective tax rates - corporate tax statistics — effective average, China (People's Republic of) or Viet Nam?
China (People's Republic of), at 21.15 Percentage of taxable income against 15.57 Percentage of taxable income in Viet Nam as of 2025.
What is the difference in effective tax rates - corporate tax statistics — effective average between China (People's Republic of) and Viet Nam?
5.58 Percentage of taxable income, with China (People's Republic of) ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for China (People's Republic of) and Viet Nam?
9 years are reported by both, from 2017 to 2025.
How do China (People's Republic of) and Viet Nam rank globally for effective tax rates - corporate tax statistics — effective average?
China (People's Republic of) ranks 3rd and Viet Nam ranks 2nd of 3 groups.
Where does this data come from?
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, published as Effective tax rates - Corporate tax statistics — Effective average tax rate. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

China (People's Republic of) vs Viet Nam: Effective tax rates - Corporate tax statistics — Effective average. Statizoid, drawing on Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved 18 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/effective-tax-rates-corporate-tax-statistics-effective-average-tax-rate/china-people-s-republic-of/viet-nam-2/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/effective-tax-rates-corporate-tax-statistics-effective-average-tax-rate/china-people-s-republic-of/viet-nam-2/">China (People's Republic of) vs Viet Nam: Effective tax rates - Corporate tax statistics — Effective average</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Effective tax rates - Corporate tax statistics — Effective average tax rate
Unit
Percentage of taxable income
Source
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Licence
OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required)
Coverage
105 places, 945 data points, 2017–2025
Last refreshed

This table reports synthetic tax policy indicators calculated on the basis of a prospective, hypothetical investment project. Unlike backward-looking ETRs, they do not incorporate any information about firms' actual tax payments.The OECD methodology has been described in detail in the OECD Taxation Working Paper No. 38 (Hanappi, 2018). Further methodological information is available in the explanatory annex.