Liechtenstein vs Malta: Environmentally related tax revenue accounts

Liechtenstein
44 US dollar
in 2021
Malta
302 US dollar
in 2022
Liechtenstein rank
27th
Malta rank
25th

Environmentally related tax revenue accounts over time

  • Liechtenstein
  • Malta
0100200300400199520082022

How they compare

Malta currently reports 302 US dollar against 44 US dollar in Liechtenstein, a difference of 258 US dollar.

That makes Malta's figure about 6.9 times Liechtenstein's.

Across all 22 years both countries report, Malta has been ahead every year.

Liechtenstein ranks 27th and Malta ranks 25th of 27 countries.

Malta has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Liechtenstein Malta Difference Ahead
2000s 24.9 US dollar 202.3 US dollar 177.4 US dollar Malta
2010s 40 US dollar 311.5 US dollar 271.5 US dollar Malta
2020s 42.5 US dollar 332 US dollar 289.5 US dollar Malta

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher environmentally related tax revenue accounts, Liechtenstein or Malta?
Malta, at 302 US dollar against 44 US dollar in Liechtenstein as of 2022.
What is the difference in environmentally related tax revenue accounts between Liechtenstein and Malta?
258 US dollar, with Malta ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Liechtenstein and Malta?
22 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2021.
How do Liechtenstein and Malta rank globally for environmentally related tax revenue accounts?
Liechtenstein ranks 27th and Malta ranks 25th of 27 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, published as Environmentally related tax revenue accounts. 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

Liechtenstein vs Malta: Environmentally related tax revenue accounts. Statizoid, drawing on Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved 07 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/environmentally-related-tax-revenue-accounts/liechtenstein/malta/

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/environmentally-related-tax-revenue-accounts/liechtenstein/malta/">Liechtenstein vs Malta: Environmentally related tax revenue accounts</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Environmentally related tax revenue accounts
Unit
US dollar
Source
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Licence
OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required)
Coverage
37 places, 847 data points, 1995–2022
Last refreshed

This dataset presents the data collected from OECD and partner economies on environmentally related tax revenue accounts with a breakdown by tax-base category and industrial activity. Taxes levied on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are explicitly reported in two sub-categories: an energy related part (recorded as an energy tax) and a non-energy related part, such as certain GHG emissions related to landfills or agriculture (recorded as a pollution tax). Four "memo items" (i.e. information items that do not change the total) are included: (i) Certain land taxes; (ii) Taxes on oil and natural gas extraction; (iii) Taxes on the resource rent; (iv) Elevated value added taxes levied on environmentally related tax-bases. The OECD ERTR accounts are consistent with the existing data collection by Eurostat and are in line with the System of Environmental-Economic Accounting - Central Framework (SEEA-CF). The dataset is updated on a biennial basis. For EU countries, it includes the information on ERTR accounts reported to Eurostat. Dataset release date: 2026 July Contact: ENV.Stat@oecd.org For further details on the dataset consult: OECD (2023), Methodological Guidelines for Environmentally Related Tax Revenue Accounts, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/d752d120-en.