WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 22 
  
  III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
(1) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS  
(i) Customs clearance procedures and valuation 
1. During the period under review, there has been little change to customs clearance procedures 
and valuation.1  Japan Customs, which is a part of the Mi nistry of Finance, continues to administer 
and enforce customs legislation. 
2. There are no special registration requirements for importers and the use of a customs broker is 
optional.  To operate as a customs broker an appr oval is required from the Director of Customs.2  
There is no nationality requirement to obtain licences. 
3. According to the latest available data, the average time between arrival of goods and the 
granting of import permission was 60.7 hours for sea cargo and 13.4 hours for air cargo (including time required under the "immediate import permissi on system upon arrival"), down from 62.4 hours 
for sea cargo and 16 hours for air cargo at the time of the last review.
3 
4. Under the Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) programme, importers with cargo security 
management and a good compliance record may f ile an import declaration and customs duty 
declaration separately;  this allows them to have goods released before filing the customs duty 
declaration.  Import declarations may be filed in ad vance of cargo arrivals.  In addition, importers are 
eligible for bonded transportation without obtaining individual permission.  Currently, manufacturers, 
warehouse operators, customs brokers, and logistics operators are eligible to become AEOs.  Japan 
has mutual recognition arrangements on AEO progra mmes with Canada, the European Union, the 
Republic of Korea, New Zealand, Singapore, and the United States, under which Japan Customs takes 
into account the status of the members of the other AEO programme when conducting its own risk assessment. 
5. All importers must file a customs declarati on;  this may now be  done before goods are 
brought into the hozei  (bonded) area.  Prior to October 2011, th e declaration had to be filed after the 
goods had been taken into a hozei  area or other designated place.  Imports are valued according to 
their c.i.f value (taken to be the tr ansaction value of the imported goods). 
6. Importers may pay the assessed customs duty through the multi-payment network system.  
The network connects teller institutions (government  authorities) with financial institutions.  The 
Government does not charge for use of the system ;  however, the financial institutions involved may 
collect fees.  At the request of importers and ot her concerned parties, written advance rulings are 
published on the customs website;  these rulings are not binding. 
                                                      
1 For further details regarding customs procedures and valuation, see WTO documents 
WT/TPR/S/243/Rev.1 May 2011 and WT/TPR/S/211/Rev.1 May 2009. 
2 Law of Customs Brokerage, Article 3. 
3 Based on the 10th Time Release Survey by Customs.  Impo rters must file a pr eliminary declaration 
online through the Nippon Automated Cargo Clearance System (NACCS) in order to be eligible for the immediate import permission system upon arrival, under which import permission may be granted as soon as 
cargo entry is confirmed.  Customs examines the docum ents and materials submitted before cargo entry, and 
provides the results of the examination.  Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 23 
 
 
  7. Since February 2010, the electronic applicati on formalities among various agencies have been 
unified through the completion of the common porta l for next generation single window.  Currently, 
eight customs offices are open round the clock (seven at the time of the last review).  
8. Under the present legislation, complaints agai nst Customs' decisions may be made to the 
Director-General of Customs within two months of the decision.  Further appeals may be lodged with 
the Minister of Finance within one month of the d ecision by the Director-General of Customs.  A law 
suit may be filed against the Minister's decision within six months of the decision.4  In 2011, there 
were 31 complaints (51 in 2010), and 5 appeals (3 in 2010);  additionally, two law suits were filed 
(none in 2010). 
(ii) Tariffs 
(a) Bound tariff 
9. In FY2012, Japan's tariff schedule comprised 9,168 lines at the HS nine-digit level.5  Japan 
has bound 98.3% of lines (159 lines are unbound) (Table III.1);  unbound lines relate mainly to fisheries (fish, crustaceans, seaweed), petroleum oils, and wood and articles thereof.  Ad valorem rates 
account for 8,432 bound lines (93.6%), of which 3, 558 lines are duty-free.  The difference between 
the average bound MFN tariff (6.4%) and the av erage applied MFN tariff (6.3%) in FY2012 was 
negligible, which reflects a high degree of predictability in the tariff.
6  Japan has not used this gap to 
raise tariffs since its previous Review.  Howe ver, the average bound rate (WTO definition) is 
considerably higher for agricultural products (17.8% ) than for non-agricultural products (3.7%).  As 
Japan completed the implementation of its Urugua y Round commitments in 2009 and has no further 
commitments in tariff reduction, the average for agricultural products is expected to remain 
unchanged. 
                                                      
4 District courts have first instance jurisdiction over such law suits.  Their decisions may be appealed to 
High Courts and then the Supreme Court. 
5 Excluding in-quota lines (in-quota lines subject to state trading are included in the calculations).  The 
Japanese tariff schedule has three distinct sets of ra tes:  statutory rates (include both general and temporary 
rates);  WTO bound rates;  and preferential rates (unde r the GSP, and EPAs with Singapore, Mexico, Malaysia, 
Chile, Thailand, Indonesia, Brunei, Viet Nam, Philippine s, Switzerland, India, and Peru).  In the case of 
statutory rates, the "temporary" rate, which is reviewed annually, is normally used instead of the higher general 
rate;  the lower of the statutory and WTO bound rates are applied to WTO Members on an MFN basis, except 
when preferential rates are applied.  Where the temporary, general, or pref erential rate is above the WTO bound 
rate, the latter rate applies to WTO Members.  Curren tly, 473 lines (including in-quota lines) or 279 lines 
(excluding only in-quota rates not subject to state trading)  or 219 lines (excluding all in-quota rates) at the 
HS nine-digit level are subject to temporary rates;  the ef fective period of these rates was extended until the end 
of FY2012. 
6 Whereas bound and applied MFN rates coincide for most lines, bound ra tes exceed applied MFN 
rates for, inter alia,  live animals and animal products  (HS Section 1);  vegetables (Section 2);  prepared foods, 
beverages, and tobacco (Section 4);  chemicals and products (Section 6);  plastics and rubber (Section 7);  
textiles and clothing (Section 11);  and base metals (Section 15).  Gaps between bound and applied rates range 
from 0.3 percentage points to 40 percentage points. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 24 
  
  Table III.1 
Structure of the MFN tariff, various years 
(%) 
MFN applied 
Final boundd     FY2008a FY2010b FY2012c 
1. Bound tariff lines (% of all tariff lines) 98.8 98.8 98.3 98.3 
2. Simple average rate 6.1 5.8 6.3 6.4 
   Agricultural products (HS01-24) 15.7 14.7 15.3 15.7 
   Industrial products (HS25-97) 3.6 3.4 3.6 3.7 
   WTO agricultural products 17.1 15.7 17.5 17.8 
   WTO non-agricultural products 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.7 
   ISIC 1 - Agriculture, hunting, fishing 5.0 4.4 5.2 5.2 
   ISIC 2 - Mining 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 
   ISIC 3 - Manufacturing 6.3 6.0 6.5 6.6 
       Manufacturing excluding food processing 3.7 3.5 3.6 3.7 
   First stage of processing 8.1 5.7 8.0 8.1 
   Semi-processed products 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.8 
   Fully processed products 6.6 6.6 7.0 7.2 
3. Duty-free tariff lines (% of all tariff lines) 41.4 41.4 40.5 38.8 
4. Simple average rate of dutiable lines only 10.5 10.0 10.7 10.7 
5. Domestic tariff "peaks" (% of all tariff lines)e 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.4 
6. International tariff "peaks" (% of all tariff lines)f 7.5 7.4 7.6 7.6 
7. Overall standard deviation of tariff rates 19.9 16.0 20.5 20.7 
8. Coefficient of variation of  tariff rates 3.3 2.7 3.2 3.2 
9. Tariff quotas (% of all tariff lines) 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 
10. Non- ad valorem  tariffs (% of all tariff lines) 6.7 6.6 6.7 6.3 
11. Non- ad valorem  tariffs with no AVEs (% of all tariff lines) 1.4 2.0 1.5 1.5 
12. Nuisance applied rates (% of all tariff lines)g 1.3 1.3 1.5 1.2 
Number of lines 8,841 8,826 9,168 9,009 
  Ad valorem  5,181 4,590 4,839 4,874 
  Duty-free lines 3,660 3,652 3,714 3,558 
  Non- ad valorem   588 584 615 577 
      Specific 209 207 236 228 
      Compound 56 56 57 58 
      Alternate 291 289 290 291 
            Other 32 32 32 0 
 
a Using AVEs based on 2007 import data, as available, provided by the Japanese authorities.  In case of unavailability, the 
 ad valorem  part is used for compound and alternate rates. 
b Using AVEs based on 2008 import data, as available, provi ded by the Japanese authorities.  In case of unavailability, the 
 ad valorem  part is used for compound and alternate rates. 
c Using AVEs based on 2010 import data, as available, provided by the Japanese authorities.  In case of unavailability, the 
 ad valorem  part is used for compound and alternate rates. 
d Calculations are only based on bound tariff lines.  The implementation of the UR was reached in 2004, except on one 
 industrial product, which was implemented in 2009.  Calculations are base d on FY2012 tariff schedule. 
e Domestic tariff peaks are defined as those exceeding three times the overall simple average applied rate. 
f International tariff peaks are defined as those exceeding 15%. 
g Nuisance rates are those greater than zero, but less than or equal to 2%. 
 Note: All tariff calculations exclude in-quota lines.  FY2008 a nd FY2010 tariff schedules are base d on HS07 nomenclature and th e 
 FY2012 tariff schedule is based on HS12. 
 
Source: WTO calculations, based on data provided by the Japanese authorities.  
 
 Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 25 
 
 
  (b) Applied MFN tariff 
Structure 
10. The structure of Japan's MFN applied tariff h as remained largely unchanged since its last 
Review.  Of the 9,168 tariff lines, 93.3% involve ad valorem  rates (40.5% are duty free).  Specific 
rates are applied to 2.6% of the lines, while 3.2%  and 0.6% of the tariff lines have specific and 
compound rates respectively.  Other rates (differential duties and sliding duties) apply to 0.3% of tariff lines. 
7  The non- ad valorem  rates of duty (6.6% of all tariff lines) apply mainly to fats and oils, 
footwear, prepared foods, live animals and animal  products, textiles and clothing, vegetables, and 
mineral products (Chart III.1).  The authorities provided ad valorem  equivalents for 478 lines; 
consequently, the tariff analysis is based on 99.2% of the 9,168 tariff lines.8  At present, 161 tariff 
lines (1.8%) are subject to tariff-rate quotas.  The out-of-quota rates for 38 tariff lines are ad valorem . 
11. In FY2012, Japan reduced applied MFN tariffs on certain products (Table III.2).  Around 
40.5% of Japan's tariff is zero rated;  rates greater than zero but less or equal to 5% apply to 24.9% of 
tariff lines and 21.5% of the tariff lies between 5% an d 10%.  Tariff-rate quotas a pply to1.8% of tariff 
lines:  all in-quota rates are ad valorem ;  while only 18% of the out-of-quota rates are ad valorem .  
Furthermore, the average rates differ considerably :  in-quota rates average 18.1%, while out-of-quota 
rates average 91.5%.  The quota allocation me thod and process remains somewhat intricate.9 
Table III.2 
Reduction in applied MFN tariffs, FY2010 and FY2012 
Product HS 2012 Applied MFN tariff FY2012 
(%) Applied MFN tariff 
FY2010 (%) 
Ginger, neither crushed nor ground 091011292 0 2.5 
Plants and part of plants 121190931 
121190939 0 
0 2.5 
2.5 
Fruit/nut paste 200799219 34 40 
200799229 21.3 25 
Hydrofluoric acid 281111000 0 3.3 
Barium nitrate 283429200 0 2.9 
Made up nets 560819091 5 6.3 
560819099 5 6.3 
560890090 5 7.2 
Embroidery 581010000 0 14.2 
581091000 0 14.2 
581092000 0 14.2 
581099020 0 14.2 
581099090 0 14.2 
Brassieres 621210000 0 8.4 
   Table III.2 (cont'd) 
                                                      
7 An alternate duty involves either an ad valorem  or specific rate;  usually the higher of the two is 
applied (except in the case of HS2204.21-2 and HS2204.29-1).  A compound duty involves a combination of 
ad valorem  and specific rates.  A differential duty involves a specific rate charged per kg of imports with the 
rate varying directly with the difference between the st andard import price, set by the authorities, and actual 
import price.  A sliding duty involves a specific tariff rate for imports valued up to a certain threshold;  the rate 
declines as the value exceeds the thres hold and becomes zero at a certain point. 
8 Ad valorem  equivalents were provided by the authorities for 478 out of 615 non- ad valorem  tariff 
lines.  For 35 lines that carry alternate rates of duty, and 27 lines with compound rates, the ad valorem  part of 
the line was used in the tariff analysis (where no AVE was provided). 
9 See WTO (2001) for details of the quota allocation method. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 26 
  
  Product HS 2012 Applied MFN tariff FY2012 
(%) Applied MFN tariff 
FY2010 (%) 
Girdles and panty girdles 621220000 0 8.3 
Corselettes 621230000 0 8 
Similar articles 621290000 0 8.4 
Unwrought antimony, powders 811010000 0 8.8 ¥/kg 
Insulated electric conductors 854420000 0 4.8 
854430090 0 4.8 
854442091 0 4.8 
854442099 0 4.8 
854449099 0 4.8 
854460090 0 4.8 
Lighters 961310000 0 2.6 
961320090 0 4.3 
961380000 0 3.4 
961390000 0 3.9 
 
Source:  WTO Secretariat;  and information provided by the Japanese authorities. 
(77)(66)(37)
(126)
(35)
(4) (0) (0) (0) (0)(215)(25)
(0) (0)(28)
( 0 )( 0 )( 0 )( 0 )(2)(0)(615)
051015202530354045
Live animal & prod.
Vegetable products
Fats and oils
Prepared food, etc.
Mineral prod.
Chemicals & prod.
Plastic & rubber
Hides & skins
Wood & articles
Pulp, paper, etc.
Textiles & articles
Footwear
Articles of stone
Precious stones, etc.
Base metals & prod.
Machinery
Transport equipment
Precision instruments
Arms & ammunition
Misc. manufactures
Works of art, etc.
TotalChart III.1
Share of non- ad valorem duties, by HS section, FY2012
Per cent
Note:
Source :Each bar depicts the percentage of tariff lines within each HS section that carry non- ad valorem duties;  the 
figures in parentheses show the corresponding number of lines.  In-quota rates are not included (lines subject to state trading are included).
WTO Secretariat estimates, based on data provided by the Japanese authorities.
 Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 27 
 
 
  Tariff averages 
12. In FY2012, Japan's overall simple average a pplied MFN tariff was 6.3%, up slightly from 
FY2010 (5.8%) (Table AIII.1).  The change in the av erage applied MFN tariff is due to a change in 
nomenclature10, as well as higher average ad valorem  equivalents (AVEs) of non- ad valorem  duties.  
Agricultural products receive much higher tariff prot ection than non-agricultural products:  the simple 
average for agriculture (WTO definition) is 17.5%, compared with 3.7% for non-agricultural 
products.  Simple average applied MFN tariffs are also relatively high for footwear and headgear, 
prepared foods, vegetables, live animals, hides a nd skins, arms and ammunition, and textiles and 
clothing (Chart III.2). 
048121620242832
Live animal & prod.
Vegetable products
Fats and oils
Prepared food, etc.
Mineral prod.
Chemicals & prod.
Plastic & rubber
Hides & skins
Wood & articles
Pulp, paper, etc.
Textiles & articles
Footwear, headgear
Articles of stone
Precious stones, etc.
Base metals & prod.
Machinery
Transport equipment
Precision instruments
Arms & ammunition
Misc. manufactures
Works of art, etc.
TotalChart III.2
Simple average applied MFN tariff rates, by HS section, FY2010 and FY2012
Per cent
Excluding in-quota rates (lines subject to state trading are included).  Including ad valorem equivalents (AVEs) 
provided by the Japanese authorities, as available.   The ad valorem part of compound and alternate rates are 
used where AVEs are not available.  
WTO Secretariat calculations, based on data provided by the Japanese authorities.Note:
Source :FY2010
FY2012
 
 
 
                                                      
10 In January 2012 Japan implemented the HS 2012 edition. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 28 
  
  13. The authorities provided ad valorem  equivalents (AVEs) based on import data for 2010 for 
approximately 77.9% of the non- ad valorem  rates.11  The simple average rate for all the AVEs 
supplied is 37.7%12;  however, the highest rate is 515.6%, for certain beans and cow peas.  Of the 
100 highest tariffs, 95 had non- ad valorem  rates.  In FY2012, the simple average of ad valorem  rates 
was 4.4% revealing that non- ad valorem  rates conceal tariff peaks;  however, the authorities do not 
consider that applying a non- ad valorem tariff is necessarily, in itself, a burden on consumers, and that 
it has certain advantages, such as administrative simplicity.   
Tariff reductions and exemptions 
14. In FY2011, customs duty reductions and exemp tions amounted to ¥187 billion (about 21.3% 
of tariffs actually collected).   
(c) Preferential rates 
15. Japan offers preferential tariff rates to 138 developing countries and 7 territories under the 
GSP;  least developed countries (48 in 2012) recei ve additional preferences.  Japan also grants 
preferential access under FTAs/EPAs for imports fro m Singapore, Mexico, Malaysia, Chile, Thailand, 
Indonesia, Brunei, ASEAN, Philippines, Switzerland, Viet Nam, India, and Peru.  EPAs with the 
latter two countries entered into force in Augus t 2011 and March 2012 resp ectively (Chapter II). 
16. Simple average tariff rates under all preferen tial arrangements (GSP, LDC, and EPAs) are 
lower than the simple av erage applied MFN rates.  However, the rates vary widely from one product 
group to another.  The overall simple average pr eferential rates range from 0.5% to 5.3%, while 
agriculture is subject to rates from 1.7% to 16.4%  (Table III.3).  Tariffs under these arrangements are 
also high for certain processed and industrial goods, such as leather, rubber, footwear and travel 
goods, and textiles and clothing impor ts (under GSP);  items such as dairy products, some footwear, 
and textiles and clothing are not included in th e GSP scheme for developing countries and are 
therefore subject to applied MFN rates of duty. 
Table III.3 
Preferential tariff rates, FY2012 
(%) 
 Ad 
valorem  
ratesa Duty-
free 
ratesa Overall 
simple 
average WTO 
agric-
ulture Dairy 
products WTO non-
agriculture Fish and 
fishery 
products Textiles Clothing Leather, 
rubber 
footwear, & 
travel goods 
Applied MFN 93.3 40.5 6.3 17.5 65.2 3.7 6.2 5.6 9.2 15.9 
GSP 93.6 58.1 5.3 16.4 65.2 2.6 5.9 4.0 8.8 15.0 
LDC 99.6 97.9 0.5 1.7 0.0 0.2 1.7 0.1 0.0 1.7 
Economic partnership agreements: 
   Singapore 96.0 81.6 3.8 15.0 65.2 1.1 4.5 0.1 0.0 15.8 
   Mexico 95.5 82.1 3.7 15.6 65.2 0.8 2.6 0.2 0.0 12.8 
   Malaysia 96.2 82.2 3.2 14.5 65.2 0.5 4.2 0.0 0.0 4.9 
Table III.3 (cont'd) 
                                                      
11 According to the authorities, AVEs for the remaining non- ad valorem  tariff lines were not available 
due to lack of imports of an unspecified number of these items, (this suggests that the tariffs involved may be 
prohibitive), or because some products are not internatio nally traded or there is little demand for the particular 
products in Japan.  
12 In comparison, the simple averag e of the AVEs at the time of Japa n's last Review was 32%, which 
was based on 2008 imports. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 29 
 
 
   Ad 
valorem  
ratesa Duty-
free 
ratesa Overall 
simple 
average WTO 
agric-
ulture Dairy 
products WTO non-
agriculture Fish and 
fishery 
products Textiles Clothing Leather, 
rubber 
footwear, & 
travel goods 
   Chile 96.2 80.7 3.4 15.0 65.2 0.6 4.9 0.1 0.0 5.4 
   Thailand 96.6 81.9 3.3 14.6 65.2 0.6 4.0 0.1 0.0 5.4 
   Indonesia 96.2 80.2 3.5 15.3 65.2 0.6 4.9 0.1 0.0 5.8 
   Brunei  95.9 79.6 3.9 15.5 65.2 1.1 4.8 0.1 0.0 15.8 
   ASEAN 96.2 79.7 3.5 15.3 65.2 0.7 4.8 0.1 0.0 6.5 
   Viet Nam 96.2 80.4 3.5 15.4 65.2 0.7 4.3 0.1 0.0 6.6 
   Philippines 96.1 80.2 3.3 14.6 65.1 0.6 3.4 0.1 0.0 6.0 
   Switzerland 96.2 79.6 3.6 15.5 65.2 0.8 5.8 0.1 0.0 6.9 
   India 96.0 78.7 3.8 16.0 65.2 0.9 5.7 0.1 0.0 8.6 
   Peru 96.2 79.9 3.6 15.8 65.2 0.7 4.5 0.1 0.0 7.3 
Memorandumb 
Brunei 96.2 79.9 3.5 15.2 65.2 0.7 4.5 0.1 0.0 6.5 
Indonesia 96.2 80.5 3.4 15.0 65.2 0.6 4.5 0.1 0.0 5.8 
Malaysia 96.2 82.3 3.2 14.5 65.2 0.5 4.0 0.0 0.0 4.9 
Philippines 96.2 80.6 3.3 14.6 65.1 0.6 3.3 0.1 0.0 6.0 
Singapore 96.3 82.0 3.4 14.9 65.2 0.6 4.3 0.1 0.0 6.5 
Thailand 96.6 81.9 3.3 14.6 65.2 0.6 3.9 0.1 0.0 5.4 
Viet Nam 96.2 80.5 3.4 15.1 65.2 0.6 4.1 0.1 0.0 6.3 
 
a As a percentage of total tariff lines. b Based on lowest rate applied from country's EPA and the ASEAN EPA. 
 
Note: Calculations are based on total tariff lines.  If no prefer ential rate is applied the corresponding MFN rate is used for the 
 calculations. 
 Calculations exclude in-quota rate s and include AVEs as available. 
 Product groups are based on Multilateral Trade Negotiations (MTN) categories. 
 
Source : WTO calculations, based on data provided by the Japanese authorities. 
17. Tariff-rate quotas apply to 142 tariff lines under th e EPAs between Japan and Mexico, and the 
in-quota rates for these lines under the EPAs are lo wer than the corresponding applied MFN rates.  
These include certain meat, fruit juice, leather, and leather footwear;  however, these agricultural 
products are not subject to tariff-rate quotas under app lied MFN rates.  Under the EPA with Malaysia, 
fresh bananas (two tariff lines) are subject to a tari ff quota, where the in-quota rate is zero.  The tariff 
quota on bananas is also applied under the EPAs wi th Mexico, Indonesia, and Thailand.  Under the 
EPA with Chile, 33 lines covering mainly meat and m eat preparations, are su bject to tariff quotas.  
Under the EPA with Thailand, seven lines (two lines  on fresh bananas, fresh pineapples, two lines on 
meat preparations of swine, cane molasses, and modi fied starch), are subject to tariff quotas. The 
EPAs with the Philippines, Switzerland, Viet Nam and Peru have 14, 9, 1, and 18 tariff lines 
respectively subject to tariff rate quotas, in mo st cases the products involved are meat and meat 
products. 
18. China remains the largest beneficiary of preferential access to the Japanese market 
(Chapter II(2)(iii));  it accounts for over three quarters of all preferential imports under the GSP 
scheme.13 
                                                      
13 Other major beneficiaries of Japan's GSP scheme include:  Myanmar (4.1% of total imports under 
preferential treatment), Bangladesh (3.9%), and South Africa (3.5%). WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 30 
  
  (iii) Rules of origin 
19. Japan provides preferential rules of origin unde r the Generalized System of Preferences and 
its various FTAs/EPAs).  To benefit from preferen tial duties, certificates of origin need to be 
provided, issued by authorized institutions in the exporting country14, so as to prove that the product 
being imported is basically "wholly obtained" or "s ubstantially transformed" (e.g. change of tariff 
classification at the HS 4-digit or 40% of value added) in the exporting country.  For goods "not 
wholly obtained", specific criteria based on change of tariff classification rules, processing rules, and 
value-added rules are applied on a product-by-produc t. Rules of origin under EPAs and the GSP apply 
these specific criteria for various products. 
20. Japan's MFN rules of origin to, inter alia,  determine whether to apply MFN rates (as opposed 
to general rates) are detailed in Article 4-2 of th e Cabinet Order for Enforcement of the Customs Law, 
and Articles 1-5 and 1-6 of the Ordinance for Enforcement of the Customs Law.15  MFN tariff rates 
are applicable to imports from eligible countries, wh ere the country of origin is defined as the country 
in which the goods concerned have been wholly  obtained or have undergone substantial 
transformation (change of tariff classification at the HS 4-digit level). 
(iv) Non-tariff border measures 
21. Under Article 69-11 of the Customs Law, Japan prohibits imports of certain products.  For 
reasons of national security, safeguarding consumer health and well-being,  preserving domestic plant 
and animal life and the environment, imports of na rcotics, certain weapons, and animals or plants 
listed in the appendices of the Convention on Intern ational Trade in Endangered Species of Wild 
Fauna and Flora (CITES), may be prohibited or subject to import licensing.  Japan's Foreign 
Exchange and Foreign Trade Law governs import li censing procedures (Chart III.3).  In addition, 
some commodities, including certain fish, are subject to import quotas. 
(a) Import prohibition and licensing 
22. Items requiring import approval include weapons and other items from the Libyan Arab 
Jamahiriya as per United Nations Security Council resolution.16  At present, products that require 
import approval or are prohibited include:  certai n marine products, medicines and chemical products, 
propellant powders, nuclear goods, weapons, animals and plants, substances that deplete the ozone 
layer, specified hazardous wastes,  waste chemical weapons goods, alcohol, rough diamonds, cultural 
property illegally removed from Iraq, all goods from No rth Korea, weapons and other items related to 
nuclear programmes or ballistic missile programme s from Iran, and weapons and other items from 
Eritrea.  Licences to import are issued free of cost. 
(b) Import quotas 
23. Japan continues to use quantitative restrictions  on imports (import quotas);  according to the 
authorities the quotas adhere to the WTO Agreements .  Products subject to import quotas (unchanged 
since 2010) include:  certain fish products and controll ed substances listed in the Montreal Protocol on 
Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. 
                                                      
14 In EPAs with Switzerland, Peru, and Mexico, certificates may also be issued by approved exporters. 
15 The MFN rules of origin are also used to determ ine the country of origin  for some trade remedy 
measures and import trade statistics.  
16 See WTO document G/LIC/N/3/JPN/10, 4 October 2011, for products subject to Japan's current 
import licensing regime. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 31 
 
 
  Source :    Act No. 228 of 1 D ecember 1949 (Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Law);  Cabinet Order No. 414 of  29 D ecember 1949 (Import
Trade Control Order);  and Public Notice of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry No. 170 of 30 April 1966(notice on items of goods subject to import quotas, places of or igin or places of shipment of goods requiring permission for im port,
and other necessary matters co ncerning import of goods);  and informatio n provided by the Japanese authorities.a                Mainly concerning the duties of the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI).Chart III.3
Import control system, 2012a
Scheme of import control (Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act)
Goods subject to
import quotas (IQ)Control procedure Law
Public 
announcement 
of IQGoods subject to 
import approvalArticle 52 of Act No. 228 and Article 3 of 
Order No. 414 stipulate that those who 
plan to import certain goods must obtain 
approval in advance.  The goods subject to 
approval are listed in METI Public Notice 
No. 170.
IQ applicationImport announcement
Reception of IQ application
Delivery of certificateArticle 9 of Order No. 414 stipulates that 
the importers of goods subject to import 
quotas must obtain quotas from the 
authorities before applying for import 
approvals.
Customs clearingImport approval 
applicationReception of import approval applicationDelivery of certificate
Confirmation by CustomsArticle 15 of Order No. 414 and Article 70 
of Custom Law stipulate customs procedures after the approval has been 
granted.Article 4 of Order No. 414 stipulates the 
procedure for the authority's granting of approval, as required by Article 3 of the 
Order.
 
24. The METI is responsible for administering the import quota system.  Eligible importers are 
issued with an import quota allocation certificate.  The method for allocating quotas, which tends to 
be complex and intricate, is specified in METI notices.17  Quota allocations are decided on an annual 
basis.  Fish-related quotas are allocated based on domestic supply and demand, e.g. the amount of 
imports, domestic production, consumption, and prices in the previous year, as well as projections for 
the coming year.  These quotas are issued by the METI with the consent of the Ministry of 
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF).  App licants for quota allocations must meet various 
                                                      
17 WTO document WT/TPR/S/107 9 October 2002;  and METI online information (in Japanese).  
Viewed at:  http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/external_e conomy/trade_control/boekikanri/import/wariate/suisan 
butsuhappyo.htm, http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/external _economy/trade_control/boekikanri/download/import/ 
2012/20120928_300_im.pdf,http://www.meti.go.jp/polic y/external_economy/trade_control/boekikanri/down 
load/import/2012/20120928_301_im.pdf [12.11.2012]. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 32 
  
  criteria.18  Some quotas are allocated on a first-come firs t-served basis.  When the amount applied for 
exceeds remaining unallocated quota, quotas are allocated by lottery. 
25. Unused quota entitlements are non-transferable and cannot be carried over to the next period.  
Additionally, the Government does not reallocate an y unused quotas.  A certificate of import quota 
allocation, normally valid for four or six months , is issued by the METI to eligible importers.   
(c) Import surveillance 
26. Japan has in place a system of prior confirmation to collect data on certain imports.  The 
system is intended to ensure that these imports ar e for specific uses, and to verify documentation and 
origin requirements.  Prior confirmation is re quired from the Minister of Economy, Trade and 
Industry, or other relevant minister;  some items require confirmation from Customs.  The system is 
used, inter alia , for goods where fraudulent declarations ha ve been found in the past or are deemed 
more high risk.  These include:  vaccine of microbial origin for experimental use;  uranium catalysts;  specified foreign cultural property;  tuna;  marlin;  whales;  psychotropics;  poppy and hemp seeds;  
certain substances listed in the Montreal Protoco l;  radioisotopes;  diamonds;  and various other 
chemicals and pharmaceutical products.
19 
(v) State trading 
27. State-trading activities in Japan involve leaf t obacco, opium, rice, wheat and barley, and milk 
products.20  The authorities maintain that the underlying reason for state-trading activities is to 
stabilize the supply and price of these commodities a nd protect consumer interests.  However, the 
prices of these commodities in Japan tend to be high er than the world prices. State-trading activities 
are generally underpinned by legislated import or  export rights and, in some cases, by specific 
monopoly rights over domestic production and distribution.  For example:  the Tobacco Business Law requires that Japan Tobacco Inc. (JT)  purchase  all leaf tobacco grown in Japan, based on an 
agreement between JT and the tobacco cultivators.  Leaf tobacco not deemed suitable as raw material 
for manufactured tobacco, is excluded from the agreement.
21  In 2011, the average price of 
domestically produced leaf tobacco was ¥1,865 per kg,  more than three times the average price of 
imported leaf tobacco (¥542 per kg).22 
(vi) Contingency measures 
28. Since its previous Review, Japan has made little use of contingency measures. 
29. The Customs Tariff Law and the relevant Cabine t Orders and Guidelines define Japan's legal 
framework regarding the use of anti-dumping, count ervailing, and safeguard measures.  Japan made 
amendments to the Guidelines for Procedures Re lating to Anti-Dumping Duty and Countervailing 
Duty in April 2011 with a view to ensuring conformity with the WTO Agreements.  These 
amendments were notified to the Committee on Anti-dumping Practices and the Committee on 
                                                      
18 In general, an applicant must be:  an importer who has in the past obtained a certificate of import 
quota and actually imported the item;  an importer who is delegated by a government-approved industrial association to obtain materials for food processing;  or an importer who plans to import items subject to the 
import quota. 
19 As of September 2011, there are no import regulations for antisera for any uses. 
20 WTO document G/STR/N/14/JPN, 6 July 2012. 
21 Articles 3.1 and 3.4, the Tobacco Business Law. 
22 WTO document G/STR/N/14/JPN, 6 July 2012. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 33 
 
 
  Subsidies and Countervailing Measures in August 2011 , and were reviewed in their meetings in 
October 2011. 23 
30. On 26 June 2012, Japan terminated two measures involving anti-dumping duties imposed on 
certain polyester staple fibre from the Republic of  Korea and the Separate Customs Territory of 
Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu;  the measure had been imposed since 26 July 2002.  On 29 June 
2012, Japan initiated anti-dumping inv estigation on imports of uncoate d certain cut sheet paper from 
Indonesia.  Currently, Japan maintains four an ti-dumping measures. They concern anti-dumping 
duties levied on electrolytic manganese dioxide originating from the Republic of South Africa, 
Australia, China, and Spain;  the measures were imposed on 1 September 2008 and the level of duties 
applied is between 14.0% and 46.5%.24 
31. Japan has not applied either countervailing or safeguard measures since its previous Review 
in 2011. 
(vii) Government procurement 
32. Data provided by the authorities indicate that Japan spends about 13% of its GDP on 
government procurement.  The stated purpose of Jap an's government procurement policy is to ensure 
the fairness and impartiality of public entities' co ntracts, equality of op portunity, and effective 
execution of the budget.  Nonetheless, it would appear that government procurement is also used as an 
instrument of industrial policy for some sectors and to support SMEs. 
33. Japan is a party to the WTO Agreem ent on Government Procurement (GPA).25  During the 
period under review, Japan made notificati ons under the GPA on:  national legislation26, statistics for 
the period 2009 and 201027, and modifications to Appendix I.28  All proposals for modifications to 
Appendix I notified since January 2009 have been certified. 
34. The Account Law and relevant ordinances specify the procurement procedures for central 
government entities, while the Local Autonomy Law a nd relevant ordinances stipulate the procedures 
for local governments.  Japan's GPA coverage encompasses all central government entities, all 
47 prefectures, 12 designated cities (shitei toshi) 29, and certain public corpora tions are listed.  Japan's 
thresholds for GPA coverage expressed in Speci al Drawing Rights (SDRs) remained unchanged 
                                                      
23 WTO document G/ADP/N/1/JPN/2/Suppl.7 (G/SCM/N/1/JPN/2/Suppl.7), 29 August 2011. 
24 WTO document G/ADP/N/230/JPN, 2 August 2012. 
25 The Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO) prov ides an electronic portal that covers all entities 
listed in Japan's Annexes to the GPA, in Japanese.  JETRO online information.  Viewed at:  
http:www.jetro.go.jp /database/procuremen t.  [10.11.2012] 
26 WTO documents GPA/37/Add.8, 13 April 2011;  and GPA/37/Add.9, 16 April 2012. 
27 WTO documents GPA/104/Add.4, 5 May 2011;  and GPA/108/Add.4, 23 February 2012. 
28 WTO documents GPA/MOD/JPN/53, 25 June 2010; GPA/MOD/JPN/54, 16 July 2010; 
GPA/MOD/JPN/55, 7 September 2010;  GPA/MOD/JPN/55/Corr.1, 19 November 2010;  GPA/MOD/JPN/56, 
17 September 2010;  GPA/MOD/JPN/57, 4 Octobe r 2010;  GPA/MOD/JPN/58, 19 November 2010; 
GPA/MOD/JPN/59, 22 November 2010;  GPA/MOD/JPN/60, 30 November 2010;  GPA/MOD/JPN/61, 8 December 2010;  GPA/MOD/JP N/62, 8 March 2011;  GPA/ MOD/JPN/63, 1 August 2011; 
GPA/MOD/JPN/64, 6 September 20 11; GPA/MOD/JPN/65, 9 Decemb er 2011; GPA/MOD/JPN/66, 14 
February 2012;  GPA/MOD/JPN/67, 9 March 2012;  and GPA/MOD/JPN/68, 14 May 2012. 
29 As of March 2012, there are 19 designated cities;  the 7 more recently designated cities are not yet 
listed in Japan's Annex 2 to the GPA currently in force.   The 19 cities have populations over 500,000 and are 
designated by a relevant Cabinet Order. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 34 
  
  during the review period.  The authorities state that local government procurement procedures are 
basically the same as those of the central government, except for Japan's voluntary measures.30 
35. In the recently concluded re-negotiation of the GPA, Japan added seven designated cities 
(shitei toshi )31 to the entity coverage, and improved its ser vices coverage (13 new services sectors).32  
Furthermore, Japan undertook covera ge commitments with regard to  the Public Finance Initiative 
(PFI), including with respect to BOT contracts, and reduced its thresholds for goods and services 
procured by central government entities to SDR 100,000 .  It also agreed to the deletion of country-
specific derogations.33 
36. Japan considers that its government procuremen t is conducted without restriction on suppliers' 
nationality or on the origin  of products or services, based on the principle of non-discrimination, and 
that all relevant entities have thoroughly implemen ted the GPA;  no price or other preferences are 
granted to domestic suppliers in  tenders covered by the GPA.  According to the authorities, no 
preference is granted to public procurement below the GPA threshold.  With respect to contracts 
under the GPA, companies participating in tenders need to satisfy certain criteria by the time a 
winning bidder is decided.  The criteria are published in official gazettes. 
37. In addition to its commitment under the GPA, Ja pan has chapters on government procurement 
in nine of its EPAs34;  the Japan–Malaysia, Japan-Viet Nam, and Japan Brunei EPAs  do not have such 
a chapter.  For example, under the Japan-Singapore and Japan-Chile EPAs, Japan's SDR threshold for 
goods and services procured by entities other than local governments, is lowered to 100,000 SDR, 
from Japan's current threshold of 130,000 SDR, under the GPA. 
38. A specific contractor may be selected under the single tendering contract method if, inter alia,  
the nature or objectives of the procurement does not  allow competition, or competition is not possible 
or disadvantageous to the Government because of th e urgent nature of the contract, or the contract 
value is small, in accordance with clause 4 or 5 of  Article 29.3 of the Accounts Law.  The authorities 
state that single tendering corresponds to "limited tendering" in the GPA. 
                                                      
30 Japan's voluntary measures include improved mark et access and the Action Program on Government 
Procurement.  In addition, there ar e voluntary measures pertaining to individual sectors, such as super-
computers, non-R&D satellites, computer products and se rvices, telecommunication, and medical technology.  
Except for these voluntary measures, certain designated local authorities (designated cities), as defined under a 
relevant cabinet order, must comply with the GPA, as mentioned above. 
31 These are (i) Saitama-shi;  (ii) Shizuoka-shi;  ( iii) Sakai-shi;  (iv) Niigata-shi;  (v) Hamamatsu-shi; 
(vi) Okayama-shi;  and (vii) Sagamihara-shi. 
32 These are:  (i) repair and servicing of personal and household goods (CPC 633);  (ii) services 
incidental to forestry and logging, including forest ma nagement (CPC 8814);  (iii) some education services 
(CPC 921, 922, 923, and 924);  (iv) motion picture services (except motion picture videogame production services (CPC 9611).  In addition, the following services with respect to central government entities: (i) Food 
serving services (CPC 642);  (ii) Beverage serving serv ices (CPC 643);  (iii) Management consulting services 
(CPC 865);  (iv) Services related to management consulting (except 86602 Arbitration and conciliation services) (CPC 866);  (v) Packaging services (CPC 876);  (vi)  Leasing or rental services concerning agricultural 
machinery and equipment withou t operator (CPC 83106 to 83108);  (vii) Leasing or rental services concerning 
furniture and other household appliances (CPC 83203); (vi ii) Leasing or rental services concerning pleasure and 
leisure equipment (CPC 83204);  and (ix) Leasing or rental services concerning other personal or household 
goods (CPC 83209). 
33 These include an opening to Canada of Japan's coverage of sub-central and other government entities 
(Annexes 2 and 3). 
34 Japan's EPAs with Indonesia, the Philippines, Switzerland, Singapore, Mexico, Chile, Thailand, 
India, and Peru have chapters on government procurement. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 35 
 
 
  39. In accordance with an announcem ent made in 2009, the Government promotes the use of 
wood with an objective of covering more than half of domestic demand for wood with domestic 
supply.35  The Act for the Promotion of Use of Wood in Public Buildings, issued on 19 May 2010, 
stipulated promotion of the use of wood in the construction of public buildings;  the authorities 
maintain that the law is operated without distinction between dom estic and imported goods. 
40. In accordance with the Basic Guideline for Public Procurement of Information Systems, 
adopted in March 2007, in the event that the amount of the contract affecting a design or development 
is estimated to be not less than ¥500 million, it must  be divided.  Government organizations are also 
required to formulate procurement plans.  
41. The total value of procurement above the threshold level of SDR 100,000 specified under 
Japan's unilateral 1994 Action Program on Gove rnment Procurement Procedures was about 
¥1.56 trillion in 2010 (down by 15.7% from 2009).36  In 2010, open tendering accounted for 69.9% of 
the total (72.9% in 2009).  During the same period, the share of selective tendering in terms of value 
increased from 1.0% to 1.1%, and that of single tendering from 26.1% to 29.0%. Procurement of 
overseas goods and services, supplied by either domes tic or foreign suppliers decreased from 9.0% to 
8.2% in terms of value.  Procurement of forei gn goods amounted to 11.2% of the total in 2010, 
compared with 13.7% in 2009 (Table III.4).37  Procurement from foreign suppliers decreased from 
3.3% in 2009 to 2.7% in 2010 in contract term s, but increased from 2.7% to 3.5% in value terms 
during the same period.  The shares of foreign s uppliers in contracts resulting from open and single 
tenders, respectively, were 1.4% and 4.7% in 2010 (1.4% and 4.2% in 2009).  As of 1 October 2012, 
77,592 firms (of which 264 were either wholly or  partially owned by foreigners) have central-
government-wide unified qualification for pa rticipating in tendering contracts for, inter alia,  
manufacturing, sales of products, and offers of service. 
42. Open tendering is the norm in Japan's governme nt procurement.  However, for procurement 
contracts between the Government and a Coopera tive Association or Federation of Cooperative 
Associations of small and medium enterprises (S MEs), the Government may use limited tendering 
procedures, in line with Cabinet Order Stipulating Special Procedures for Government Procurement of 
Products or Specified Services (Cabinet Order 300,  18 November 1980).  Procurement from SMEs is 
"encouraged" under the Law on Ensuring the Receipt  of Orders from the Government and Other 
Public Agencies by Small and Medium Enterpri ses (enacted in 1966);  under the Law, the 
Government, local authorities, and other public agencies must endeavour to expand procurement 
opportunities for SMEs, by way of, inter alia,  providing information on procurement plans. 
Nonetheless, no tendering is reserved exclusivel y for SMEs.  These laws and regulations apply 
equally to domestic and foreign SMEs. 
                                                      
35 This policy goal is written in the New Growth Strategy, which was decided by the Japanese 
Government on 18 June 2010.  The Cabinet online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.kantei.go.jp/ foreign/kan/topics/sinseichou01_e.pdf [12.11.2012]. 
36 See WTO (2001) for details of the Action Program.  Procurement for public works (including 
architectural planning and consultanc y) is excluded from the programme. 
37 Foreign suppliers are defined under the Action Program as a "corporation in which approximately 
more than 50% of shares are owned by foreign invest ors/capital".  Total goods procurement declined from 
¥1,081.3 billion in 2009 to ¥923.1 billion in 2010;  the largest increase was in miscellaneous articles.  The 
number of contracts decreased from 10,106 to 8,592 over the same period.  The number of services contracts 
rose from 4,356 in 2009 to 4,657 in 2010, while the value of such contracts decreased from ¥772.9 billion to 
¥639.8 billion. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 36 
  
  Table III.4 
Procurement by product and by origin, 2009 and 2010 
(¥100 million and %)  
No. Products 2009  2010 
Total value Foreign 
share  Total 
value Foreign 
share 
1 Products from agriculture, and from agricultural and food processing  8.6 0.8  23.9 0.0 
2 Mineral products 232.3 66.1  396.3 21.5 
3 Products of the chemical and a llied industries 42. 7 8.6  40.1 5.0 
4 Medicinal and pharmaceutical  products 706.6 15.9  248.4 30.8 
5 Artificial resins; rubber, raw hide s and skins; leather; and articles 
thereof 27.2 0.0  20.0 2.7 
6 Wood and articles of wood;  pa per making material; paper and 
paperboard and articles thereof 173.7 0.1  119.8 0.1 
7 Textiles and textile articles; thr ead for spinning and weaving; and 
articles thereof 66.0 4.0  46.4 3.3 
8 Articles of stone, of cement and similar materials; ceramic products; 
glass and glassware;  and articles thereof   9.6 0.0  3.3 0.0 
9 Iron and steel and articles thereof 164.8 1.8  197.5 0.1 
10 Non-ferrous metals and artic les thereof 35.5 0.0  29.9 13.1 
11 Power generating machinery and equipment 77.1 15.7  42.6 15.9 
12 Machinery specialized for partic ular industries 129.5 1.5  248.1 0.6 
13 General industrial machinery and equipment 80.7 13.7  85.8 4.0 
14 Office machines and automatic data pr ocessing equipment 3,049.3 2.4  2,952.0 4.2 
15 Telecommunications and sound r ecording and reproducing apparatus 
and equipment 1,305.2 2.6  857.4 2.3 
16 Electrical machinery, apparatus and appliances, and electrical parts 
thereof 269.0 6.9  229.3 10.8 
17 Road vehicles 586.9 0.1  335.6 0.1 
18 Railway vehicles and associated equipment 30.2 51.9  52.1 30.9 
19 Aircraft and associated equipment 83.1 97.1  100.1 53.8 
20 Ships, boats and floating structures 92.8 0.7  34.5 0.0 
21 Sanitary, plumbing, and hea ting equipment 8.7 0.0  23.4 2.2 
22 Medical, dental, surgical and vete rinary equipment 1,045.4 45.2  654.6 42.5 
23 Furniture and parts thereof 63.2 0.0  42.0 0.0 
24 Scientific and controlling instrument s and apparatus 1,587.5 26.4  1,165.3 25.5 
25 Photographic apparatus and equipment, optical goods, and clocks 150.9 9.4  47.6 5.9 
26 Miscellaneous articles 786.5 6.8  1,235.4 2.9 
  Total 10,813.1 13.7  9,231.4 11.2 
Source:  Government of Japan online info rmation.  Viewed at:  http://www. kantei.go.jp/jp/kan bou/22tyoutatu/and 
http://www.kantei.go.jp /jp/kanbou/23tyoutatu/. 
43. Most cases of proven infringement of Japan's An ti-monopoly Act (AMA) c ontinue to involve 
bid-rigging related to public works.  Three cases of bid-rigging involving government officials were made known to the public in the years 2010 and 20 11.  The Act for Promoting Proper Tendering and 
Contracting for Public Works defines major policy instruments for preventing bid-rigging and other 
improper actions.
38  As regards Japan's bid-challenge pr ocedures, complaints about procurement 
procedures by the Central Government and public corporations are processed by the Office for 
Government Procurement Challenge System (CHANS) and considered by the Government Procurement Review Board (GPRB).  The procuri ng entity is obliged to follow the recommendations 
                                                      
38 For details see WTO document WT/TPR/S/243/Rev.1 May 2011. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 37 
 
 
  of the GPRB.  Four complaints have been filed since 2010.39  Each local government covered by the 
GPA has its own review body and its own regulation on the structure and administration of its review 
body.  The authorities state that members of the body are selected in line with Article XX:6 of the 
GPA. 
(viii) Standards, technical regulations, and sanitary and phytosanitary measures 
(a) Standards and technical regulations 
44. Technical regulations and conformity assessme nt procedures are governed by various laws 
and regulations, including:  the Pharmaceutical Affa irs Law, the Industrial Standardization Law, and 
the Law Concerning Standardization and Proper Labelli ng of Agricultural and Forestry Products (JAS 
Law).40  Furthermore, these laws form the legal basi s for implementing the TBT Agreement in Japan.  
Japan has identified the Standards Information Servi ce within the International Trade Division of the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs41 and the Standards Information Serv ice within the Business Service 
Department of the Japan Exte rnal Trade Organization (JETRO)42, as the enquiry points under the TBT 
Agreement.43  The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is Japan's  notification authority under the Agreement. 
45. While regulatory impact assessments are conducted by each ministry on technical regulations, 
no cost-benefit analyses were made av ailable to the secretariat.  Howe ver, according to the authorities 
the Implementation Guidelines for ex-ante Evaluation of Regulations state that it is desirable to 
quantify or express the costs and bene fits in monetary terms to the extent possible.  The Guidelines 
also state that cost-benefit analys is whereby costs and benefits are defined in monetary terms is a 
major technique of "Regulatory ex-ante Evaluation".  As part of the process for the  adoption of 
technical regulations and conformity assessment pr ocedures, the agency responsible must publish 
proposed regulations and provide any interested persons an opportunity for comment.44  Since 
October 2007, based on the MIC's Implementation Gu idelines for ex-ante Evaluation of Regulations, 
regulatory impact assessments have  been made compulsory for the adoption of regulations through a 
law or a cabinet order (as well as for amendments or  abolition).  Regulatory impact analyses have not 
                                                      
39 Of these four complaints, three were dismissed an d one was upheld.  For details, see Cabinet Office 
online information (in Japanese).  Viewed at:  http ://www5.cao.go.jp /access/japan/shori-j. html [12.11.2012]. 
40 Other relevant laws and regulations include the Building Standard Law,  the Food Sanitation Law, 
the Electrical Appliance and Material Safety Law, the Consumer Product Safety Law, the High Pressure Gas 
Safety Law, the Road Vehicle Law, the Safety Regulatio ns for Road Vehicles, the Rational Use of Energy Law, 
and the Fire Service Law, the Law c oncerning the Safety Assurance and Quality Improvement of Feed, the Law 
concerning Examination and Regulation of Chemical Substances and Regulation of their Manufacture, the Industrial Safety and Health Law, the Telecommunica tions Business Law, the Radio Law, and the Fertilizer 
Control Law. 
41 The Ministry of Foreign Affairs mainly handles enquiries on drugs, cosmetics, medical devices, 
foodstuffs, food additives, telecommunication facilities, mo tor vehicles, ships, aircra ft, and railway equipment 
(excluding enquiries concerning certain JIS, which are handled by JETRO). 
42 JETRO mainly handles enquiries  on electrical equipment, gas appliances, measurement scales, 
foodstuffs, food additives, and JIS related to medical devices, motor vehicles, ships, aircraft, and railway 
equipment. 
43 WTO document G/TBT/2/Add.10, 11 June 1996. 
44 The procedure applies when technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures fall within 
certain categories specified in admini strative orders under the Administrative Procedure Act.  The agency 
responsible is required to provide at least 30 days for comments.  WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 38 
  
  been conducted when adopting some regulations through an ordinance, which is inferior to a cabinet 
order.45 
46. Since July 2010, Japan has made 66 notifications of technical regulation to the WTO.46 
Voluntary standards 
47. In 2011, voluntary standards comprised 10, 339 Japanese Industrial Standards (JIS) and 
214 Japan Agricultural Standards (JAS) (Table II I.5).  To ensure compliance with the TBT 
Agreement, Japan has been aligning JIS to intern ational standards if corresponding international 
standards exist.  In 2011, approximately 56% of JIS were comparable to international standards (48% 
in 2009), 97% of these were aligned with international standards in 2 011 (96% in 2009).  As a result 
in 2011, about 54% of all JIS were aligned with  international standards.  Between April 2010 and 
February 2012, 755 JIS items were  revised, 277 were withdrawn, and 347 were newly established. 
48. The authorities note that it is impossible for IS O or IEC standards to match every product in 
every country.  Where a product is not traded intern ationally, or when the nature of the product is 
dependent on culture, history or the climate of the country, independent standards need to be 
developed.  In the case of Japan, the authorities not ed that many products have no international 
equivalent, such as tatami  (traditional floor covering), futon  (Japanese mattress), Japanese rice cooker, 
Japanese electric fan, pocket warmers, and Japanese lo w table with heat source.  These products need 
domestic standards.  
49. The authorities also state that standards for building materials and processes are much higher 
in Japan because the country is lo cated in an earthquake-prone area.  If these standards were presented 
to the ISO, they would not be adopted, as other countr ies do not need such high standards.  Therefore, 
in regard to the JIS, the METI considers it necess ary to develop its own industrial standards, which 
may not necessarily be aligned with international standards (Chart III.4). 
Table III.5 
Main standards and technica l regulations in Japan, 2011 
(%) 
 Number of 
standards/ 
regulations Corresponding 
to 
international 
standardsa Equivalent 
to 
international 
standards Acceptance 
of overseas 
certificationb Acceptance 
of overseas 
test datab 
A.  Mandatory technical regulations      
Pharmaceutical Affairs Law 2,043 .. .. .. .. 
Food Sanitation Law 647 .. .. .. .. 
Electrical Appliance and Materials Safety 
Law 454 .. .. 
.. .. 
Consumer Product Safety Law 10 .. .. .. .. 
High Pressure Gas Safety Law 2 .. .. .. 100 
Building Standard Lawc .. .. .. .. .. 
Safety Regulations for Road Vehicles 84 .. 46 46 .. 
Law concerning the Safety Assurance and 
Quality Improvement of Feed .. .. .. .. .. 
Table III.5 (cont'd) 
                                                      
45 The Implementation Guidelines for ex-ante Evaluation of Regulations state that it is desirable to 
quantify or express in monetary value costs and benefits to the extent possible.   
46 WTO documents G/TBT/N/JPN/337-405. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 39 
 
 
   Number of 
standards/ 
regulations Corresponding 
to 
international 
standardsa Equivalent 
to 
international 
standards Acceptance 
of overseas 
certificationb Acceptance 
of overseas 
test datab 
Law concerning Examin ation and Regulation 
of Chemical Substan ces and Regulation of 
their Manufacture  4 .. .. .. 100 
Industrial Safety and Health Law 181     
Telecommunications Business Lawd .. .. .. .. .. 
Radio Lawe .. .. .. .. .. 
Fertilizer Control Law .. .. .. .. .. 
B.  Voluntary standards       
Japan Industrial Standards (JIS)  10,339 56 97 .. .. 
Japan Agricultural Standards (JAS) 214 34 75 .. .. 
 
.. Not available. 
 
a Defined as "primary aspects sharing a common scope". b Where applicable. 
c Building Act Code. 
d According to the authorities, the number of mandatory technical regulations is not available because the scope and definition  of 
mandatory technical regulations are ambiguous ; the technical conditions of terminal e quipment in Japan generally comply with 
ITU-T/ITU-R Recommendations and Radio Regulations, and international harmonization is given consideration. 
e According to the authorities, the number of mandatory technical  regulations is not available because the scope and definition  of 
mandatory technical regulations are ambiguous;  the technical conditi ons of radio stations in Japan generally comply with ITU-R  
Recommendations and Radio Regulations, and international harmonization is given consid eration.  Regarding the system for the 
certification of radio equipment, the Radi o Law was amended to establish the system for accepting foreign test results and 
foreign certification (promulgated in 1998, entered into effect in 1999). 
 
Source:  Information provided by the Japanese authorities. 
50. Under the provisions of the Japan Agricultura l Standards Law (JAS Law), international 
standards (such as Codex) must be "taken into acco unt" before establishing or  revising JAS.  As a 
result the authorities do refer to relevant internati onal standards when establishing or revising JAS.  
Furthermore, under the JAS Law, there are mandato ry technical standards, such as quality labelling 
standards and JAS for organically produced produc ts, as well as voluntary standards.  During the 
period under review, quality labelling standards (mandatory standards)  for 44 products were revised, 
while 19 voluntary standards have been revised sin ce 2010.  The JAS for organic plants and processed 
organic foods, which are mandatory sta ndards, were revised in March 2012. 
51. About 8,000 domestic and 700 foreign factories in 21 countries and economies are certified to 
affix JIS marks (JIS Mark scheme).  The JIS Mark  scheme is voluntary unless relevant regulations 
require JIS for domestic sales.  The authorities state that domestic and foreign factories are treated in 
the same manner with regard to certification of the JIS marks, and the JIS Mark scheme is internationally harmonized, based on ISO/IEC 17065.  Currently, 25 organizations are accredited as 
JIS mark certification bodies.   
52. Compliance with the JAS is not necessary for im ports into Japan.  The JAS Law allows third-
party organizations to certify operators (e.g . manufacturers) to affix JAS marks.  The  Minister of 
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries as well as Re gistered Certifying Bodies (RCBs) and Registered 
Overseas Certifying Bodies (ROCBs) are respons ible for monitoring and managing JAS marks.
47  
Foreign producers or manufacturers that are cer tified by RCBs and ROCBs may conduct their own 
grading and affix the JAS marks to their products.  At present, there are 30 ROCBs (20 for organic 
                                                      
47 For further details see WTO document WT/TPR/S/243/Rev.1 May 2011 WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 40 
  
  products and 10 for forestry products).  Under th e JAS Law, foreign enterprises certifying operators 
that produce, process, and/or distribute agricultural or forestry products in conformity with the JAS 
may be accredited as ROCBs. 
Source :   Information provided by the Japanese authorities. Chart III.4
JIS development process
Technical CommitteeMinister in charge
Inquiry
Minister in chargeJapanese Industrial 
Standard Committee
Notification in the official gazetteInvestigation and research Voluntary preparation by industry
JIS draft
Boards
Report
EstablishmentDeliberation on the JIS draft
 
Mandatory technical regulations 
53. Technical requirements for the registration of pharmaceuticals were changed during the 
review period.  The changes included the minimu m requirements for biological products being added 
to and changed48;  for reasons of public safety, poisonous and deleterious substances and substances 
that would affect the central nervous system were ne wly designated, and the criteria for the containers 
used to transport such substances was changed.49 
                                                      
48 WTO documents G/TBT/N/JPN/354, 6 April 2011; G/TBT/N/JPN/358, 19 May 2011; 
G/TBT/N/JPN/369, 24 October 2011;  G/TBT/N/JPN/381, 20 February 2012. 
49WTO documents G/TBT/N/JPN/331, 27 Ma y 2010; G/TBT/N/JPN/332, 27 May 2010; 
G/TBT/N/JPN/363, 12 August 2011;  G/TBT/N/JPN/338, 21 July 2010;  G/TBT/N/JPN/338/Rev.1, 
27 July 2010;  G/TBT/N/JPN/353, 25 March 2011;  and G/TBT/N/JPN/364, 22 August 2011. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 41 
 
 
  54. Changes to the Industrial Safety and Health  Law, amended the manufacturing code for 
elevators in the workplace.50  New items were added to the list of  products subjected to the Consumer 
Product Safety Act and the Electrical Appliances and Material Safety Act.51  New standards relating 
to product safety were also established.52 
55. The authorities stated that Japan has amended its safety and environmental regulations for 
road vehicles to align them with regulations unde r the UN Agreement dealing with the Adoption of 
Uniform Technical Prescriptions for Wheeled Vehi cles, Equipment and Parts which can be fitted 
and/or be used on Wheeled Vehicles (1958 Agreem ent). As a result, Japan  has amended technical 
requirements for, inter alia,  seatbelts and headlights since 2010.  
Conformity assessment 
56. Overseas manufacturers of electrical  and c onsumer products may undergo conformity 
assessment and certification conducted in foreig n countries by foreign registered conformity 
assessment bodies, in accordance with relevant laws (e .g. the Electrical Appliance and Material Safety 
Law and the Consumer Product Safety  Law).  Additionally, under the provisions of the High Pressure 
Gas Safety Law, some cylinders and designated equipment for high pressure gas made by foreign 
manufacturers are allowed to omit some inspections if the manufacturers are registered with the 
Government.  Japan accepts test data on chemical  products developed in other countries based on 
OECD Test Guidelines and OECD GLP principles and the Decision of the OECD Council concerning 
the Mutual Acceptance of Data in the Assessment of Chemicals.53 
57. The METI has designated 23 inspection bodies (up from 22 in 2011), of which 8 are foreign. 
The designated inspection bodies include:  8 bo dies under the Consumer Product Safety Law, 12 
under the Electrical Appliance and Material Safety  Law, 2 under the Law Concerning the Securing of 
Safety and Optimization of Transaction of Liquefi ed Petroleum Gas, and a single entity under the Gas 
Utility Industry Law. 
58. As part of the a mutual recognition agreement  between Japan and the United States:  there 
are 5 registered approval bodies and 5 registered foreign conformity assessment bodies dealing with 
the Telecommunications Business Law;  and there are 12 registered approval bodies and 11 registered 
foreign conformity assessment bodies under the Radio Law. 
59. Additionally, under the Third Party Certifica tion System for medical devices, 13 notified 
bodies have been registered, of which 6 are foreign affiliated companies.  However, all the notified 
bodies are based in Japan.  Under the Industrial Safe ty and Health Law, registered inspection bodies 
are classified into four types:  registered bodies for inspection on production;  registered bodies for 
inspection on machines in use;  registered bodies for individual inspection before circulation;  and registered bodies for conformity inspection by production types.  Currently, there are 15 registered bodies.  In addition to the registered bodies, d esignated foreign inspection bodies are allowed to 
produce documents on testing results on machines a pproved under the Industrial Safety and Health 
Law in order for them to be replaced with offici al on-site inspections.  Currently, there are nine 
designated foreign inspection bodies. 
                                                      
50 WTO document G/TBT/N/JPN/356, 3 May 2011. 
51 WTO documents G/TBT/N/JPN/333, 16 June 2010; G/TBT/N/JPN/334, 17 June 2010; and 
G/TBT/N/JPN/351, 7 January 2011. 
52 WTO document G/TBT/N/JPN/362, 12 August 2011. 
53 Based on the Chemical Substances Control Law. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 42 
  
  (b) Sanitary and phytosanitary measures 
60. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, the Ministry of Health, Labour and 
Welfare, and the Food Safety Commission continue to be responsible for Japan's SPS measures.  The 
laws governing the establishment of SPS measures in clude the Food Sanitation Law, the Quarantine 
Law, the Plant Protection Law, and the Act on Dom estic Animal Infectious Diseases Control, while 
Japan's enquiry point and national notification authority under the SPS Agreement remains the 
Standards Information Service within the Intern ational Trade Division of the MOFA's Economic 
Affairs Bureau.54  The procedure for establishing SPS meas ures also remained unchanged during the 
review period.55 
61. During the period under review, Japan submitted 41 SPS notifications to the WTO.56  Over 30 
of the revisions include changes to maximum resi due limits (MRLs) for pesticides and amendments 
on food additives.  According to the authorities, Jap an has systematically reviewed the MRLs for the 
target compounds or components based on risk evaluation from a purely scientific standpoint, taking into consideration the food intake of the Japanese  population.  However, no cost-benefit analyses have 
been conducted.  Japan considers that MRLs under the positive list system, which was introduced in 
May 2006, are based on Codex standards and, to a lesser degree, on standards established by 
countries/economies where MRLs are assumed to be established based on toxicity study data equivalent in quantity to those used in scientif ic evaluations by the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on 
Pesticide Residues (JMPR) and the Joint F AO/WHO Experts Committees on Food Additives 
(JECFA).
57  Additionally, the authorities state that Japan  publishes the results of the risk assessments 
when introducing, amending, or abolishing la ws and regulations related to SPS measures. 
62. Other changes to SPS requirements included, inter alia :  changes to Animal Health 
Requirements for processed animal protein impor ted into Japan, under which the imports of bone 
charcoal for water purification were allowed58;  establishment of new standards for calf liver59;  new 
import requirements for mangoes from Pakistan60; and the revision of the Ministerial Ordinance of 
Standards and Specifications for Safety of Pet Food.61 
63. In order to prevent the invasion of animal diseases from abroad and minimize associated 
risks, the authorities revised the Act on Domestic Animal Infectious Diseases Control in April 2011.62  
Under the provisions of the revised Act, animal quarantine officers have the authority to inspect 
passengers and crew members of all nationalities arri ving in Japan, and to disinfect their luggage and 
other personal effects at air and sea ports.  With a view to controlling rabies, Japan introduced the 
same import conditions for pet animals (includi ng dogs) from the United Kingdom, Ireland, Sweden 
and Norway, as for those from other EU Member States.63 
                                                      
54 WTO document G/SPS/ENQ/26, 11 March 2011. 
55 For more details regarding SPS legislation and procedures please see WTO document 
WT/TPR/S/243/Rev.1 May 2011. 
56 WTO documents G/SPS/N/JPN/262-301. 
57 Australia, Canada, the European Union, New Zealand, and the United States. 
58 WTO document G/SPS/N/JPN/277, 9 June 2011. 
59 WTO document G/SPS/N/JPN/297, 3 May 2012. 
60 WTO document G/SPS/N/JPN/272, 23 February 2011. 
61 WTO document G/SPS/N/JPN/270, 7 February 2011. 
62 WTO documents G/SPS/N/JPN/271, 16 February 2011;  and G/SPS/N/JPN/271/Corr.1, 
21 February 2011. 
63 WTO documents G/SPS/N/JPN/286, 13 Decem ber 2012;  and G/SP S/N/JPN/286/Add.1, 
19 January 2012. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 43 
 
 
  64. Regulations under the Plant Quarantine Act we re revised during the period under review.64  
Changes included:  the establishment of a quarantine pest list;  amendments to the non-quarantine pest 
list not subject to phytosanitary measures;  ame ndments to the current list of pest/plant/area 
combinations subject to inspection at growing sit es in exporting countries; amendments to the current 
list of pest/plant/area combinations subject to impor t prohibition;  and the establishment of a system to 
allow the import of prohibited items on the prem ise that exporting countries conduct conventional 
phytosanitary measures. 
65. Japan currently imposes import prohibitions on beef and poultry from various countries to 
prevent the spread of BSE and avian flu.65  The authorities maintain that the process of lifting the 
import ban includes technical consultations, c onsideration of import requirements, and the 
implementation of risk assessment that takes due account of the OIE code66, and involves consultation 
with relevant domestic industries, consumers, and requesting countries.  Since December 2005, Japan 
has allowed beef imports from the United States and Canada under the condition that "specified risk 
material" (SRM) is removed from all the cattle, and all beef products exported to Japan are from cattle 
of 20 months of age or younger. In Decemb er 2011, Japan decided to review its general 
countermeasures against BSE (both domestic and border measures).  The Food Safety Commission 
(the risk assessment body in Japan), is conducting a risk assessment of beef  from the United States, 
Canada, France, and the Netherlands.  The Ministry  of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) is to 
review the countermeasure against BSE based on the result of the FSC's assessment.  With regard to 
beef from other countries, Japan conducted on-site reviews in Ireland and Poland in June 2012. 
Conformity assessment 
66. Under the provisions of the Food Sanitation Law, imported food may be exempted from 
inspection upon importation into Japan if a cargo is inspected by an official inspection organization in the exporting country and bears the result of the inspection.
67  However, items such as bacteria and 
mycotoxins, whose characteristics may change during transportation, are not exempted.  The 
inspection bodies must be registered with the G overnment of Japan, through the government of the 
exporting country.68  As of February 2012, 3,895 such laboratories were registered. 
(c) Bilateral, regional, and multinational arrangements on TBT and SPS measures 
67. During the period under review, Japan concl uded two FTAs/EPAs that include SPS and TBT 
chapters:  the Japan-India EPA, which entered into  force in August 2011, and the Japan-Peru EPA, 
which entered into force in March 2012.  Japan also has mutual recognition agreements (MRAs) on 
conformity assessment procedures with the European Union for electrical products,  
telecommunications terminal equipment, and radio equipment, good laboratory practice for chemicals, 
and good manufacturing practice for medicinal prod ucts (since January 2002);  with Singapore for 
electrical products, telecommunications termin al equipment, and radio equipment (since 
                                                      
64 WTO documents G/SPS/N/JPN/266, 4 November 2010;  and G/SPS/N/JPN/292, 9 February 2012. 
65 At the end of June 2010, imports of beef were prohibited from Austria, Belgium, the 
Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Germany, Greece, France,  Ireland, Israel, Italy, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, 
the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom.  
Imports of poultry were prohibited from 56 countries/regions.  
66 WTO document WT/TPR/M/211/Add.1, 22 May 2009. 
67 Items whose results are subject to change duri ng transportation (bacteria,  mycotoxin, etc.) are 
excluded. 
68 Results of examinations based on the AOAC (Association of Analytical Communities) method, 
which are either endorsed or established by the exporting country, are accepted. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 44 
  
  November 2002);  and with the United States for te lecommunications terminal equipment and radio 
equipment (since January 2008). 
68. Japan states that it will negotiate mutual rec ognition agreements based on industries' requests 
with countries or regions where technical barriers to trade are expected to be reduced, and where there 
is compatibility of both sides' regulations and equality of competence in accreditation and 
supervision.69 
69. Japan is a member of the Codex Alimentari us Commission and the World Organization for 
Animal Health (OIE), and a contracting party to th e International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC).  
Its contact points are:  Director of Plant Quaran tine Office, Plant Protection Division, Food Safety and 
Consumer Affairs Bureau, the MAFF (in relation to I PPC);   Director of Animal Health Division, 
Food Safety and Consumer Affairs Bu reau, the MAFF (in relation to OIE);  and Director of Office for 
Resources, Policy Division, Science and Technology  Policy Bureau, the Ministry of Education, 
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (in relation to  Codex).  Japan participates in the International 
Conference on Harmonization toward the harmonizat ion of pharmaceutical standards/regulations. 
(d) Labelling and packaging requirements 
70. Food labelling in Japan is governed by the JAS Law and the Food Sanitation Law.  Under the 
provisions of the JAS law, 52 mandatory labelling st andards for food are currently in force.  These 
include: cross-category quality labelling standards for processed foods, fresh foods, and genetically 
modified foods70, and individual quality labelling standards.71  Food that contains additives must also 
be labelled with the additives included.  Importe d processed food does not require labelling of place 
of origin of the ingredients, which is ma ndatory for domestically produced processed food .  All 
organic plants and organic processed foods to be so ld in Japan must comply with the JAS organic 
standards and carry the JAS organic mark.72 
71. The Food Sanitation Law requires that any allerg enic substances contained in processed foods 
must be indicated on the labels.  At present, it is  mandatory to include eggs, milk, wheat, buckwheat, 
peanuts, crab, and shrimps in the description of ingredients; while it is recommended to include 
abalone, squid, salmon roe, oranges, kiwifruit, beef , walnuts, mackerel, salmon, gelatine, soybeans, 
chicken, pork, matsutake-mushrooms, peaches, yams, apples, and bananas.  
72. Under both the Food Sanitation Law and the JAS La w, genetically modified (GM) foods must 
be labelled as such.  Presently, the list of GM pr oducts that need to be labelled comprises 8 crops 
(soybeans, corn, rape seed, potatoes, cotton seed, alfa lfa, papaya, and sugar beet) and 33 kinds of 
designated processed food, mainly made of soybeans or  corn;  it also includes the newly added papaya 
                                                      
69 WTO document WT/TPR/M/211/Add.1, 22 May 2009. 
70 Cross-category quality labelling standards are provid ed for all processed foods and beverages (except 
alcohol and medical drugs).  Fresh food s must be labelled with their name and place of origin.  Processed foods 
must be labelled with the name, the list of ingredients, the net content, the date of minimum durability or use-by 
date, instructions for storage, the name and address of the manufacturer, and the country of origin (only for imported products). 
71 Specific labelling requirements are provided as qu ality labelling standards for individual products 
depending on their characteristics. 
72 To label food as "organic", certification that th e food meets certain JAS requirements is needed from 
a registered certifying body or a registered overseas certifying body.  Only certified food is allowed to be 
distributed with a JAS organic mark. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 45 
 
 
  and processed foods containing papaya as a main ingredient.  The Ministry of Health, Labour and 
Welfare does not permit imports of GM foods th at do not meet its safety requirements. 
73. During the period under review, changes to  the food labelling system under the Food 
Sanitation Law included:  the requirement that a pples, apricots, cherries, Japanese plums, kiwifruits, 
loquats, nectarines, peaches, pears, pomegranates,  and quinces be labelled with the names of post-
harvest fungicide materials used73;  papaya and processed foods containing papaya as a main 
ingredient are now subject to mandatory labe lling as required for genetically modified foods74; and 
meat that can be eaten raw is required to carry the warning that "eating raw meat carries a risk of food poisoning".
75 
74. Changes to the food labelling system under the JAS Law included the addition of brown sugar 
and brown sugar products a nd Kombu-maki to the list of food items that are domestically processed 
and that require indication of the place of origin of their ingredients76;  papaya and processed foods 
containing papaya as a main ingredient were added to the list of items subject to mandatory labelling 
under the Quality Labelling Standard  for Genetically Modified Foods77;  additionally, the quality 
labelling standards for "Tsuyu" (dipping soup) and soy bean paste were changed in FY2011.78  The 
authorities stated that the labelling system of or ganic plants and organic processed foods under the 
JAS law was to be amended in spring 2012.  The changes have been notified to the WTO.79 
(ix) Import promotion measures 
75. There have been no changes to import prom otion measures provided by Japan since 2010. 
Programmes include:  free consultation regarding sm all-lot imports;  providi ng reference materials, 
such as wholesale catalogues, import guides, and im port handbooks;  conducting seminars in Japan;  
and business missions to international trade shows.   These programmes are mainly implemented by 
the Manufactured Imports and Investme nt Promotion Organization (MIPRO). 
(2) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING EXPORTS  
(i) Procedures 
76. At the time of exportation, the following documen ts must, in principle, be submitted to the 
Customs:  export declaration (Customs form C-5010), invoice, and certifications, permits, or 
approvals required by vari ous laws and regulations. 
77. As a result of an amendment to the Custom s Act in 2011, goods manufactured by an AEO 
manufacturer with cargo security management and a good compliance record may be declared for 
export by an exporter other than the authorized manuf acturer without  being placed in a customs area.  
The authorized manufacturer must consign the exports  to an exporter with a good compliance record.  
The authorities consider that this amendment has made the AEO programme comprehensive, covering 
almost all trade-related businesses in a supply chain. 
                                                      
73 WTO document G/SPS/N/JPN/264, 4 November 2010. 
74 WTO document G/SPS/N/JPN/276, 14 April 2011. 
75 WTO document  G/SPS/N/JPN/282, 28 July 2011. 
76 WTO document G/TBT/N/JPN/349, 9 December 2010. 
77 WTO document G/TBT/N/JPN/355, 26 April 2011. 
78 WTO documents G/TBT/N/JPN/348 and 359 , 9 December 2010 and 23 June 2011. 
79 For details of the changes see WTO documents G/TBT/N/JPN/372, 2 November 2011;  and 
G/TBT/N/JPN/373, 2 November 2011. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 46 
  
  78. For the purpose of implementing FTAs/EPAs current ly in force between Japan and some of 
its trading partners, the Ministry of Economy, Tr ade and Industry (METI) is the competent authority 
for issuing certificates of origin.  The METI has designated the Japan Chamber of Commerce and 
Industry (JCCI) as an issuing body for certificates of origin. 
(ii) Export taxes, charges, and levies 
79. There are no export taxes or levies in operation in Japan. 
(iii) Border adjustment in respect of internal taxes and import duties (relating to exports) 
(a) Consumption tax 
80. The consumption tax is zero-rated on e xported goods, international aviation and 
transportation services, and selling or licensing pate nts to foreigners.  Domestic components and raw 
materials used in exported goods are e ligible for refund of consumption tax. 
(b) Import duties 
81. Import duties (tariffs) levied on raw material s used in the production of certain exported 
goods may be exempted, reduced, or refunde d, as determined by the Government.80 
Exemption and reduction of import duties 
82. Certain items used as raw materials for the pr oduction of certain exported goods are fully 
exempted from tariffs:  lead (for the production of alloys using lead and antimony);  cotton seed oil 
(for fish products (canned or bottled));  soya b ean oil cake, certain starches and molasses (for the 
production of monosodium glutamate);  sugar (for re fined sugar);  certain starches (for caramels);  
molasses (for lysine);  certain starches (for refine d glucose);  and inputs approved by Customs (for 
export goods approved by Cu stoms), unchanged since 2011. 
83. Reduced tariff rates apply to certain inputs (for the production of certain exported goods) at 
the time of importation:  wheat flour (for th e production of monosodium glutamate) and certain 
starches (for the production of vitamin C, crysta llized glucose, and erythorbate or sorbitol). 
84. In order to be eligible for this tariff exemp tion or reduction, manufacturers require approval 
from Customs as a "manufacturing factory", and manufactured goods need to be exported within two 
years of importation of relevant inputs.  The manufacturers must submit an import declaration and 
other relevant documents for the imports to be u sed as inputs (as prescribed in the Cabinet Order for 
the enforcement of the Law), and obtain impor t permission for the relevant materials. 
                                                      
80 Customs Tariff Law, Article 19;  and Article 47 Cabinet Order for Enforcement of the Customs 
Tariff Law. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 47 
 
 
  Refund of import duties 
85. Import tariffs applied to sugar (for the produc tion of canned fruits, confectioneries, syrup, 
etc.) are fully or partially refundable depending on the sucrose content.81  In order to be eligible for 
such a refund, manufacturing factories require  approval from Customs, and must keep a 
manufacturing record of the products for two years;  the record must be submitted to Customs at the 
time of exportation of the product. 
86. Re-exported imports that involve no change in na ture and form, or dete rioration, damage, or 
claims are eligible for refund of the import tariff.82 
(iv) Export prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing 
87. Items subject to export controls, as set out in  the Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Law 
and the Export Trade Control Order, include: arms and certain dual-use items based on the 
UN Security Council Resolution 1540 and other re levant international commitments, such as 
international export control regimes;  and some  other items under the Convention on International 
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).83  The authorities maintain that the 
main purpose of Japan's export controls is to preserve limited natural resources84 and ensure national 
security;  export controls are also applied to cer tain products under Japan's  free-trade agreements. 
88. In 2011, Japan amended its Customs Law with a view to preventing expor ts of certain devices 
and programmes that help in circumventing techno logical restrictions prescribed under the Unfair 
Competition Prevention Act.85 
89. During the period under review, Ja pan added or deleted some products on the list of items 
subject to export licence (granted by the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry) based on relevant 
agreements of some interna tional export control groups.86 
                                                      
81 Article 52, the Cabinet Order for Enforcement of the Customs Tariff Law. 
82 Articles 10, 19-3 and 20 of the Customs Tariff Law. 
83 For an unofficial English translation of the Export Control Order, see Cabinet Office online 
information.  Viewed at:  http://www.cas.go.jp/jp/sei saku/hourei/data/ETCO.pdf [10.07.2012].  Other export 
items requiring permission from the Minister of Econo my, Trade and Industry in clude:  certain seeds, 
endangered animals, and plants specified  in international treaties;  narcotics;  designated art works;  counterfeit 
currencies;  and other products associat ed with criminal offences in Japan.  For certain agricultural products, 
including wheat bran, rice bran, oat bran, clams, mussels and eels, the Minister also  needs the consent of the 
Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries prior to granting export approval.  Export controls (prior approval) are maintained to ensure national security and public safety and to ensure adequate domestic supplies 
of certain agricultural and other primary products (Article 48, Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Law). 
84 The authorities state that export items that are re gulated to preserve limited natural resources include 
those listed in Appendix I, II, III of the CITES. 
85 For details, see Article 2(1)(x) of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act, which was also amended in 
2011.  
86 On 1 July 2011, boron alloys, laser acoustic det ection equipment, and "compensation systems" for 
magnetic or underwater electric field sensors were added to the list, and boron carbide and optical fibre 
communication cables or related accessories were removed fr om the list.  Japan is a signatory to various treaties 
on nuclear, biological, and chemical non-proliferation, and serves on the existing international export control 
regimes:  the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), the Australia Group (AG), the Missile Technology Control 
Regime (MTCR), and the Wassenaar Arrangement (WA). WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 48 
  
  90. On 1 April 2012, Japan eliminated the export approval requirement of the Minister of 
Economy, Trade and Industry on:  fish flour and fish waste, feed mixtures for fish breeding, seminal roots and seedlings of mints, seeds of larix leptolepis, and logs of betulaceae. 
91. Japan does not apply export quotas. 
(v) Export cartels and voluntary export restraints 
92. While export cartels are exempted from the ge neral prohibition of cartels under Japan's Anti-
monopoly Act, the authorities indicate that there are no known export cartels in Japan.
87 
93. Japan does not apply voluntary export restraints. 
(vi) Export promotion schemes 
(a) Export subsidies, finance, insurance, and guarantees 
94. The Japan Bank for International Cooperati on (JBIC), and Nippon Export and Investment 
Insurance (NEXI) administer medium- and long-ter m export credits.  According to the authorities 
provision of these credits is based on the term s and conditions of the OECD Arrangement on 
Officially Supported Export Credits.  In FY2010, the JBIC's total export credit commitments were 
¥151.2 billion, and the total amount insured by NEXI was ¥8.6 trillion. 
95. The authorities indicate that Japan has no su bsidy or tax concession schemes to promote 
exports. 
(b) Other export promotion schemes 
96. Export promotion schemes handled by the Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO) 
include provision of information and support for participation at international trade fairs and 
exhibitions.  No changes were in troduced during the review period. 
97. The Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fish eries provides support to agricultural exporters 
through, inter alia :  information-sharing on Japanese agricultu ral products and foodstuff;  carrying out 
market research in foreign countries;  and holding seminars abroad and in Japan.  The budget for 
export promotion amounted to ¥2.3 billion in FY2011 and ¥1.5 billion in FY2012.88 
(3) MEASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE  
(i) Taxation and tax-related assistance 
98. Direct taxes, which include individual income  tax and corporation tax, are expected to 
account for about 57.2% of tota l tax revenue in FY2012 (about 56.1% in FY2011) according to 
annual budgets (Table III.6).  Indirect taxes, wh ich include consumption tax (VAT) and excise taxes 
(applied, inter alia, to liquor, tobacco, gasoline, and automob iles), account for the remainder of total 
tax revenue.  The highest individual income tax rate , including local taxes, is 50%, and the highest 
corporation tax rate (including local taxes) is 35. 64% (FY2012).  All income earned in Japan is 
                                                      
87 Under the Export and Import Transaction Law, prior notification must be given to the Minister of 
Economy, Trade and Industry for approval, before establishing an export cartel. 
88 The figures included supplementary budget for reconstruction from the great East Japan earthquake. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 49 
 
 
  taxable, for both residents and non-residents, and th e corporation tax rate is the same for foreign and 
domestic corporations.  Consumption tax, which is  levied at a rate of 5% on goods and services 
transactions, is the largest component of indirect taxes, contributing 23.0% of total tax revenue in 
FY2012.89 
Table III.6 
National government tax revenue, FY2011 and FY2012 
(¥ billion and %) 
Tax item FY2011 budget   FY2012 budget 
Amount Percentage   Amount Percentage 
Direct taxes 24,271 56.1   25,919 57.2 
Individual income tax 13,490 31.2 13,491 29.8 
Corporation tax 7,792 18.0 8,808 19.5 
Special corporation taxa, b 1,566 3.6 1,659 3.7 
Inheritance tax 1,423 3.3 1,430 3.2 
    Special Individual Income Tax for  
    Reconstruction n.a. n.a.  50 0.1 
   Special Corporation Tax for Reconstruction n.a. n.a.  481 1.1 
Indirect taxes 18,991 43.9   19,365 42.8 
Customs duty 815 1.9 910 2.0 
Consumption tax 10,199 23.6 10,423 23.0 
Liquor tax 1,348 3.1 1,339 3.0 
Tobacco tax  816  1.9 945 2.1 
Gasoline tax 2,634 6.1 2,611 5.8 
Liquefied petroleum gas tax 12 0.0 11 0.0 
Aviation fuel tax 46 0.1 44 0.1 
Petroleum  and coal tax 512 1.2 546 1.2 
Promotion of power resources development tax 346 0.8  329 0.7 
Motor vehicle tax 428 1.0 417 0.9 
Tonnage tax 9 0.0 10 0.0 
Stamp tax 1,057 2.4 1,032 2.3 
Local Gasoline taxa, b 282 0.7 279 0.6 
Liquefied petroleum gas taxa, b 12 0.0 11 0.0 
Aviation fuel taxa, b 13 0.0 13 0.0 
Motor vehicle taxa, b 294 0.7 286 0.6 
Special tonnage taxa, b 11 0.0 13 0.0 
Special tobacco surtaxb 157 0.4 146 0.3 
Total 43,262 100 45,283 100 
 
n.a. Not applicable. 
 
a Local transfer tax. b Revenues are distributed to special accounts. 
 
Note: Figures are based on Japan's official  tax revenue prospects, announced in Ja nuary 2011 (for FY2011) and January 2012 
 (for FY2012). 
 
Source: Information provided by the Japanese authorities. 
99. Tax revenue in Japan has been decreasing, and th is has contributed to high public debt.  The 
Government has recognized the need to broaden th e income tax base, and Japan's FY2012 tax reforms 
include measures to broaden the tax base. 
                                                      
89 For the details of exempted transactions, see WTO (2009).  The 5% consists of the national 
consumption tax (4%) and a local consumption tax (1%). WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 50 
  
  (a) Tax incentives 
100. The focus of Japan's system of tax incentiv es is on achieving various policy objectives, 
including investment to address environmental concerns or promote R&D.90  The incentives are 
detailed in the Special Taxation Measures Law, wh ich set out 311 special tax measures (in FY2012) 
involving, inter alia,  accelerated depreciation, tax credits, and reduced tax rates.  Since its previous 
Review, Japan has reviewed 170 of the special tax measures, abolished 29, and modified 67.  The authorities estimate that tax revenue forgone th rough these tax incentives is about ¥5 trillion.  
(b) Recent reforms 
101. Tax reforms undertaken in FY2011 included extension, until December 2013, of the 
application of the reduced tax rate on divide nds and capital gains on listed stocks (from 20% 
(statutory rate) to 10%);  reduction of the corp oration tax rate by 5.05 percentage points, in 
April 2012;  and reduction of the preferential corpor ate tax rate for SMEs from 18% to 15%, against 
the background of Japan's statutory corporate tax rate being the highest within the OECD and the 
neighbouring Asian region until recently.
91 
102. Tax reforms in FY2012 included the extension of  special treatment of R&D tax credit until 
the end of FY2013, the adoption of immediate depr eciation for solar panels and wind electricity 
equipment, the extension of "reserve for overseas i nvestment loss" for two years, and the introduction 
of special tax measures to establish the Rec onstruction Industry Cluster Zone in Fukushima 
Prefecture.  Japan has also extended the "eco- car" tax cut for three years (until April 2015), and 
introduced the "carbon dioxide tax of global warmin g countermeasure", which adds certain taxes in 
relation to the amount of CO 2 emission (effective 1 October 2012).92 
(ii) Subsidies and other financial assistance 
103. Japan has notified various specific subsidy programm es to the WTO.  In its latest notification, 
Japan indicated 67 subsidy schemes to assist civil ai rcraft, agriculture and fisheries, industry, and 
finance.93  The notification lists, items eliminated si nce the notification in 2009, including assistance 
or subsidies related to:  civil aircraft;  fuel ce ll systems;  oil spill response programme;  biofuel;  
nuclear energy technology development;  natural gas storage;  research for the promotion of natural 
gas in regional areas;  research and development of salt manufacturing technology;  soybean;  fruits;  
cocoons;  wood industry upgrading fund;  and the Japan Finance Corporation. 
104. The notification included some newly introduced subsidies, for:  promoting the introduction 
of certain boilers;  loans to develop domestic o il and natural gas;  projects concerning the stable 
supply of petroleum products as well as petrol eum from oil-producing countries;  developing 
advanced future fuel technology;  advancement of reprocessing fuel;  promoting gas centrifuge to 
                                                      
90 Under the special tax measures aiming at promo ting investment, reserve accounts prepared for the 
loss of share value of oil exploitation companies include deductible expenses at a constant rate.  Foreign limited 
partners' profits from domestic limited partners (LPS) are exempted from income tax. 
91 See WTO (2011).  As a result of th e statutory corporate tax rate redu ction, for example, the effective 
income tax rate on corporations is now 35.64% (40.69% previously).  Ministry of Finance online information (in 
Japanese).  Viewed at:  http://www.mof.g o.jp/tax_policy/summary/corporation/084.htm. 
92 This added ¥760/kl to crude oil and petroleum products, ¥780/t to gaseous hydrocarbons, and ¥670/t 
to coal, starting 1 October 2012. 
93 WTO document G/SCM/N/220/JPN, 29 June 2011. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 51 
 
 
  develop uranium enrichment technology;  finance measures related to Sake  manufacturers;  and 
subsidy for Japan Finance Corporation. 
105. With a view to stimulating the domestic ec onomy, the Japanese government re-introduced 
subsidies for purchasing new environmentally frie ndly vehicles in December 2011;  subsidies are 
provided for individuals that purchase any vehicle, domestically produced or imported, that meets 
certain criteria. 
106. Based on the New Growth Strategy, which indicat es that potential demand is largest in seven 
strategic areas, the Government has concentrated its resources into  the development of these areas.94  
In July 2012, the Rebirth of Japan:  A Comprehe nsive Strategy was adopted as a cabinet decision to 
succeed the New Growth Strategy.  Four key policy areas (energy and environment;  health;  
agriculture, forestry and fisheries;  and SM Es) are to be prioritized over three years.95 
(iii) State-owned enterprises, corporatization, and privatization 
107. The State retains a stake in major companies in  financial services, telecommunications, some 
international airports, petroleum, tobacco, and railways.  As of March 2012, the Government held:  
32.6% of the stock of Nippon Tele graph and Telephone Corporation (N TT);  50.0% of Japan Tobacco 
Inc. (JT);  100% of New Kansai International Airpor t Co., Ltd;  100% of Narita International Airport 
Corporation;  18.96% of INPEX Corporation;  a nd 34.0% of Japan Petroleum Exploration Co. Ltd 
(which holds 7.32% of INPEX's total shares).  All shares of Hokkaido Railway Company, Shikoku 
Railway Company, Kyushu Railway Company, and Japan Freight Railway Company are held by 
Japan Railway Construction, Transport and Technol ogy Agency, a government-affiliated corporation. 
The Innovation Network Corporation of Japan (INCJ), was established in July 2009 for a period of 15 
years,  was capitalized at ¥152 billion, of which the Government injected 91.02% (Chapter IV(3)).96 
108. The Government is required to sell some of its JT stocks "as soon as possible", thereby 
reducing its ownership to about one third of the total shares. 
109. Some SOEs are aimed at providing assistance to private firms.  The Deposit Insurance 
Corporation of Japan (DICJ), a semi-governmental co rporation partially financed by the Government, 
holds shares of certain commercial banks, such as Resona Bank, for prudential reasons.  The 
Enterprise Turnaround Initiative Corporation (ETIC) , established in October 2009 as a state-owned 
enterprise to "turnaround" privat e companies, is financed 50% by the Government and 50% by 
financial institutions (through the DICJ). 
110. The Government also influences various semi-governmental bodies.97 
                                                      
94 The strategy was adopted by the Cabinet on 18 June 2010.  The seven areas are environment and 
energy;  medical and health care;  economic integration with other Asian countries;  tourism and revitalization 
of regional economies;  science and technology;  human resources;  and financial services. 
95 Numerical targets (concerning e.g. demand, employment, and overseas sales (for SMEs)) have been 
established for the fo ur strategic areas. 
96 As of 23 April 2012, the INCJ had invested ¥ 400 billion in 23 projects.  See the INCJ online 
information.  Viewed at:  http://www.incj.co.jp/english/ news html [25.07.2012].  Th e liabilities of the INCJ are 
to be backed by the Government up ¥1,800 billion. INCJ online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.incj.co.jp/english/ [25.07.2012]. 
97 A comprehensive list of these entities was not made available to the Secretariat.  The authorities find 
it difficult to prepare such a list because  of the vast number of such entities.  WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 52 
  
  111. Based on the Cabinet Decision on a Reorganization and Rationalization Plan for Special 
Public Institutions, adopted on 18  December 2001, 148 public corpora tions (out of 163 subject to 
reform) had been reformed by 1 October 2009.98  Nine public corporations are still to be reformed 
(including the Kansai International Airport and NTT) .  It would appear that no further developments 
have taken place in this regard since Japan's previous Review.  
112. The authorities maintain that the mandat es of state-owned banks ("policy financial 
institutions"), such as Japan Finance Corporation, are to supplement activities of private financial 
institutions in funding support for SMEs and pe rsonal businesses, and financing for securing overseas 
resources.  In accordance with the Development Bank of Japan Inc. Law, the Government plans to 
review the Bank's organization by the end of FY2014;  the review is to involve, inter alia,  shares held 
by the Government. 
113. In accordance with the Fundamental Review of Incorporated Administrative Agencies 
adopted by the Cabinet on 25 December 2009, the Government implemented the Basic Policy for 
Review of Functions and Projects of Incorporated Administrative Agencies at the Cabinet Council on 7 December 2010 to scrutinize the efficiency and effectiveness of the functions and projects of all 
incorporated administrative agencies.  Furthermore, on 20 January 2012, it approved the Basic Policy 
for Review of System and Organization of Incorporated Administrative Agencies at the Cabinet Council, to review the systems a nd organizations of incorporated administrative agencies for the 
period since 2011.  
(iv) Intellectual property rights 
(a) Introduction 
114. Japan has a modern IP system.  A significant development was the adoption of the Basic Law 
on Intellectual Property (the Basic Law) in Novemb er 2002 as part of Japan's national strategy to 
improve its international competitiv eness and revive its national ec onomy.  The general goal of the 
Basic Law was to realize a dynamic and compe titive economy and society through creation of a new 
intellectual property framework.  The Basic Law gave clear mandates to the State to take measures in 
eight areas:  to promote R&D activities in the high value-added area;  to promote transfer of 
technology from universities to business sectors;  to improve IP acquisition procedures and legal 
proceedings to support businesses activities;  to st rengthen IP enforcement;  to establish harmonized 
international IP systems;  to provide effectiv e and appropriate protection for innovation in new 
technological areas;  to research and analyse domestic and international trends of IP protection;  and 
to promote IP education and develop IP human resources. 
115. The Basic Law also identified th e roles of different institutes in implementing the mandates. 
The Intellectual Property Strategy Headquarters (the  Headquarters) was established in the Cabinet 
Secretariat in March 2003 with the purpose of developing measures to fulfil the mandates and to coordinate the work of various governmental  authorities responsible for administration and 
enforcement of IPRs (Chart III.5).  The Headquarters comprises political and expert members.  
Political members include the Prime Minister, as Di rector-General of the Headquarters, all the 
Cabinet Ministers, and ten expert members. Th e ten expert members are generally drawn from 
industries, law firms, and academia. 
                                                      
98 Japanese Government online information (in Japa nese).  Viewed at:  h ttp://www.gyoukaku.go.jp/ 
siryou/tokusyu/seiri_gouri.pdf [25.07.2012]. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 53 
 
 
  Source :   WTO Secretariat.Chart III.5
Structure of IPR administration and enforcement
Cabinet Secretariat 
National Intellectual Property Strategy Headquarters
Ministry of Economy, 
Trade and Industry
(METI)
Agency for Cultural Affairs Food Industry Affairs BureauMinistry of Education, 
Culture, Sports, 
Science and TechnologyMinistry of Agriculture, 
Forestry and FisheriesMinistry 
of Finance
New Business and 
Intellectual Property Division •General Affairs Department
•Trademark, Design and
Administrative Affairs 
Department
•First, Second, Third 
and Fourth Patent 
Examination Departments
•Appeals DepartmentCustoms and 
Transit Bureau
Plant Variety Protection Office 
(PVP Office )Japan Patent Office (JPO) 
Japan Copyright Office
 
116. Since 2002, pursuant to the objectives and ma ndates set out in the Basic Law, the 
Headquarters has issued nine national IP strategi c programmes on an annual basis.  The programmes 
from 2003 to 2009 led to a dramatic reform of Japan's IP regime with a focus on improving 
substantive IP legislation (Table III.7), and IP in frastructure.  The main infrastructure improvements 
were (1) Establishing of Intellectual Property High Court in April 2005, (2) Establishing of 
technology licence offices at universities, (3) Restru cturing of education systems for IP professional 
training, and (4) an increasing number of patent examiners and patent attorneys. 
117. In 2010, the Government started to adapt its IP strategies to respond to the changing 
international and national economic  environment brought about by the rapid development of digital 
technology.  Building on the 2010 programme, the National IP Strategic Programme 2011, launched 
in June 2011, is intended to set the IP policy di rection for Japan's innovation and economic growth in 
next 10 to 20 years. 
 WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 54 
  
  Table III.7 
Amendments of main substantive IP legislations, November 2012 
Legislation Date enacted Amendments 
Patent Act 13 April 1959 14 December 1994;  22 December 1999;  23 May 2003;  4 June 2004;  
29 June 2005; 7 June 2006; 18 April 2008;  and 8 June 2011 
 
Utility Model Act 13 April 1959 14 December 1994, 12 June 1996, 22 December 1999;  23 May 2003;  
4 June 2004;  29 June 2005;  7 June 2006; 18 April 2008;  and 8 June 2011 
 
Designs Act 13 April 1959 14 December 1994;  12 J une 1996;  22 December  1999;  23 May 2003;  
29 June 2005;  7 June 2006;  18 April 2008;  and 8 June 2011 
 
Trademark Act 13 April 1959 14 December 1994;  12 Ju ne 1996;  22 December 1999;  29 June 2005;  7 
June 2006;  18 April 2008;  and 8 June 2011  
Copyright Act 6 May 1970 12 May 1995; 26 Decemb er 1996;  12 June 1998;  9 June 2004;  
22 December 2006; 19 June 2009;  and 3 December 2010  
Law on the Circuit Layout of a Semiconductor Integrated Circuits  31 May 1985  12 November 1993;  and 2 June 2006 
Plant Variety Protection and Seed  Act 29 May 1998  18 June 2003;  17 June  2005;  and 18 May 2007 
 
Source: WIPO Lex. 
(b) National Intellectual Property Strategy Programme 2011 
118. The National IP Strategic Programme 2011 aims to adapt Japan's IP system to the change 
brought about by the rapid development of digital t echnology.  It identified IP strategic priorities in 
four areas:  international standardization;  cutti ng-edge digital network;  the culture industry and 
innovation. 
International standardization 
119. Japan has been a leader in the electronics industry since the 1980s.  Activity in electrical 
engineering technology (EE), especially in electrical  machinery, apparatus, energy;  audio-visual 
technology;  computer technology;  and semiconduc tors, is a central driver of its innovation and 
patenting activity.  This is demonstrated by the number of EE patent appli cations and their proportion 
of overall patent applications, as well as the numbe r of PCT applications received by JPO and their 
proportion of worldwide PCT applications.  
120. National patent applications in the EE fiel d have averaged about 125,600 since 2000, 
accounting for around 35% of overall patent applications (Chart III. 6 and Chart III.7).  More than 
90% of these applications were from busi ness sectors rather than universities. 
121. Since 2000, PCT applications received by the JPO in the EE field have increased steadily, 
(by 16.9%) (Chart III.8).  Japan has been one of top three PCT receiving countries in the EE field since 2000 (Chart III.9).  During 1978-2011, 12 Japanese IT companies were among the top 50 PCT applicants for all the PCT applications filed worldwide.  
 Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 55 
 
 
  020,00040,00060,00080,000100,000120,000140,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Number of applications Chart III.6
Japanese patent applications (unexamined patent publications) by fields of electrical engineering, 2000-10
Source :  WIPO Statistics database.Electrical machinery, apparatus, 
energyAudio-visual technologyTelecommunicationsDigital communicationBasic communication processesComputer technologyIT methods for managementSemi-conductors
 
0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Overall
Electrical engineeringNumber of applicationsChart III.7
Japanese patent applications (unexamined patent publications), overall vs. electrical engineering, 2000-10
Source :  WIPO Statistics database. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 56 
  
  02,0004,0006,0008,00010,00012,00014,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Number of applicationsChart III.8
PCT applications received by the JPO, by fields of electrical engineering, 2000-11
Source :   WIPO Statistics database.Electrical machinery, apparatus, 
energyAudio-visual technologyTelecommunicationsDigital communicationBasic communication processesComputer technologyIT methods for managementSemi-conductors
 
010,00020,00030,00040,00050,00060,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Number of applicationsChart III.9
PCT applications in electrical engineering, by leading countries, 2000-11
Source :   WIPO Statistics database.JapanUnited StatesGermanyKorea, Rep. ofChinaOther
 
122. Japan's technological advantages in the EE field did not necessarily bring competitive 
advantages for Japan's IT industries.  While global  trade (both exports and imports) of IT products 
have increased rapidly since 1996, Japan's share of the trade has declined steadily .  Its share of exports 
dropped from 14.9% in 1996 to 6% in 2010, while its share of imports decreased from 7.4% to 4.5%.  Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 57 
 
 
  123. According to the JPO, Japan's market share fo r digital cameras, DVD players, liquid crystal 
displays, automotive navigation systems, and sola r cells has dropped rapidly since the 1990s.  The 
decline in Japan's international competitiveness in  the IT market was partially attributed to 
standardization in the information and communication technology (ICT) industry. 
124. Against this background, the National IP Strate gic Programme 2010 put forward a strategy on 
international standardization for the first time.  Under the strategy, the Government intended to 
encourage both public and private sectors to intensif y their efforts in international standard-setting 
processes, particularly in seven technological fiel ds:  advanced medical technologies, water, next 
generation vehicles, railway, energy mana gement, digital contents, and robotics. 
125. The National IP Strategic Programme 2010 reaffi rmed the importance of an international 
standardization strategy in improving Japan's international competitiveness, and recommended 
making a linkage between Japan's technological adva ntages and international competiveness through 
IP protection and international standardization.  It  set up clear target indictors as of 2020:  (1) to 
formulate and implement standard roadmaps in specif ic standardization fields;  (2) to encourage the 
Japanese, especially its young citizens, to serve as chairpersons and supervisors in international 
standards organizations (800 persons);  (3) to in crease the number of standard-setting processes where 
Japan works as secretariat (150 cases);  and (4) to est ablish international standards in the areas where 
assessment methods and standards play important ro les in realizing environmental protection, and 
safety and security. 
Cutting-edge digital network 
126. Japan launched its national Electronics-Japan (E -Japan) strategy in 2001 and a New Strategy 
in Information and Communications Technology in 2010.  Both of these strategies attempted to 
establish an advanced and ubiquitous network society in Japan, which would help to simulate Japan's 
economy growth and address social problems stemming from the aging society.  As a corresponding strategy, the National IP Strategic Programme 2011 identified four priorities to develop Japan's 
network society from the perspective of intellectua l property: to promote the digitalization of the 
National Diet Library collection to enable the public to view its contents on the internet;  to improve 
digital infrastructure, especially eliminating legal barriers and uncertainties with cloud computing, and 
to improve the legal environment for internet plat form operators;  to strengthen IP enforcement, 
especially combatting internet piracy;  and to research  legal issues related to secondary creation, such 
as parody, in order to encourage digital creation. 
Innovation 
127. The patent system is a core IP mechanism fo r promoting innovation a nd economic growth in 
Japan.  To adapt the patent system in the interest  of innovation is always a policy priority for the 
Government of Japan.  The innovation strategy atte mpted to further improve Japan's patent system 
and make it more attractive and user-friendly to  both domestic and foreign users (section (c)). 
The Culture Industry 
128. In June 2010, the METI established the Cr eative Industry Promotion Office to promote 
Japanese cultural and creative industries under th e slogan of "Cool Japan";  this office was 
restructured into the Creative Industry Division in Ju ly 2011.  The Cool Japan project aimed to spread 
Japanese culture and exploit its commercial value worldw ide.  The project played an important role in 
spurring Japan's economy, especially after the great East Japan earthquake.  Under the project, Japan WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 58 
  
  intends to rebuild its food, tourism, and traditiona l crafts brands to help recover from the damage 
caused by the earthquake. 
Green technology plan 
129. In addition to the four strategic priorities id entified in the National IP Strategic Programme 
2011, the green technology plan is part of a long-st anding IP-related national st rategy.  Japan is an 
industrial giant with very limited natural resources and a very high population density;  this generates 
a strong need for environmental technology to en sure sustainable development of the economy.  
Promoting environmental technology is an essentia l part of Japan's IP, energy, and environment 
policy. 
130. In order to encourage innovation and patenting activity in environmental technology, the JPO 
established a green-related accelerated patent examin ation pilot programme in 2009:  the pendency of 
first official action was shortened from an  average 22 months to about 2 months. 
131. Japan's high environmental R&D expenditure a nd efficient patent system have made it a 
leader in environment technology.  Since 2000,  Japan's PCT applications for environmental 
technology have increased steadily, with average gr owth of 16.9%.  Japan remains one of the top 
three countries in terms of PCT applications  in environmental technology (Chart III.10). 
05001,0001,5002,0002,5003,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Number of applicationsChart III.10
PCT applications in environmental technology by leading countries, 2000-11
Source :   WIPO Statistics database.JapanUnited StatesGermanyKorea, Rep. ofChinaOther
 
132. While the PCT applications increased stead ily, Japan's national applications for 
environmental technology have experienced a decrease of 7.2% since 2005.  This was in line with the 
decrease of overall national patent applications, which may be attributed partly to economic 
constraints and to the industry's adaptati on to the patent strategy (Chart III.11). 
 Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 59 
 
 
  01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Japanese national patent applications (unexamined patent publications)
Japanese PCT applications (publications)Number of applicationsChart III.11
Japanese national patent applications and PCT applications in environmental technology, 2000-11
Source :  WIPO Statistics databases. 
133. The Japanese Intellectual Property Associati on (JIPA) introduced the Green Technology 
Package Programme (GTPP) in 2010, with the ma in purpose of establishing a global comprehensive 
environmental technology information database, wh ich would facilitate the transfer of technology 
between prospective technology users and potential providers worldwide. 
134. Based on the GTPP programme and in close co llaboration with the JIPA, WIPO launched 
WIPO Green, in 2010, in an effort to respond to the UNFCCC's call for promoting and cooperating in 
the development, application, and diffusion of e nvironmentally sound technology.  WIPO Green was 
intended to provide a platform for both the u ser and provider of environmental technology to 
accelerate the adaptation, adoption and deployment of environmental technology, particularly in 
developing countries and emerging economies. 
(c) Industrial property rights 
Patents 
Trends of patent applications in Japan 135. The patent system is a core IP mechanism fo r promoting innovation a nd economic growth in 
Japan.  Annual patent fillings in the JPO have grad ually decreased since 2006;  this can be attributed 
to Japan's domestic and global economic recession.  In contrast, the number of patents granted and 
PCT filings have increased steadily (Chart III.12).  This may indicate that the impact of economic 
recession on Japan's patenting activity was limited and that the industry adapted its patenting strategy 
in response to the difficult economic conditions by fi ling patents for innovations that had higher value 
and more market potential. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 60 
  
  050,000100,000150,000200,000250,000300,000350,000400,000450,000500,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011National patent applications Granted patents PCT applicationsNumberChart III.12
Patent applications, granted patents,  and PCT filings in the JPO, 2000-11
Source :   WIPO Statistics database. 
136. During the review period, Japan made further efforts to modify the patent system.  The efforts 
focused particularly on how to improve patent legi slation and patent examinat ion procedures in order 
to make the patent system more attractive and user-friendly to both domes tic and foreign users. 
Amendment of the Patent Act 137. A new amendment to the Patent Act was adopted  in May 2011, and it entered into force on 
1 April 2012. 
138. The amendment made substantive changes to the provisions on examination procedures and 
licensing practices in order to improve the conve nience and effectiveness of the patent system 
(Table III.8). 
Table III.8 
Amendments to provisions on examination procedures and licensing practices 
Amendment Relevant law 
Review of the perfection system for non-exclusive 
licences Articles 34-5 and 99 of the Patent Act;  Articles 4-2 and 19(3) of the Utility 
Model Act; and Articles 5-2 a nd 28(3) of the Design Act 
Establishment of remedial measures against 
misappropriated applications Article 74 of the Patent Act 
Prohibition of filing a request for a correction trial with 
the JPO after filing a lawsuit against a trial decision with 
the IP High Court  Articles 126(2), 134-3, 156, 164-2, 181, and Appended Table of Article 
195(2) of the Patent Act 
Restriction on assertions in retr ial of a court's judgment in 
patent infringement lawsuit  Articles 104-3 and 104-4 of the Patent Act; Article 30 of the Utility Model 
Act; Article 41 of the Design Act; and Articles 13-2(5), 38-2, 39, and 68(3) 
of the Trademark Act 
 Table III.8 (cont'd) Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 61 
 
 
  Amendment Relevant law 
Development of provisions on the scope of a JPO's trial 
decision that has become final and binding Articles 126, 134-2, 167-2, 180, 181, and 182 of the Patent Act; Articles 41 
and 47(2) of the Utility Model Act; and Articles 43-14, 55-3, 60-2, and 
63(2) of the Trademark Act 
Abolition of the erga omnes e ffect, on third parties, of a 
final and binding trial decisi on in a patent invalidation 
trial  Article 167 of the Patent Act; Article  41 of the Utility Model Act; Article 
52 of the Design Act; and Article 56(1) of the Trademark Act 
Review of the provision concerning exception to lack of novelty of an invention  Article 30(2) of the Patent Act; Article  11(1) of the Utility Model Act; and 
Article 4(2) of the Design Act 
Improved remedy for a failure to comply with the time limit for submission of a translation and payment of 
patent fee  Articles 36-2, 112-2, and 184-4 of the Patent Act; Articles 33-2 and 48-4 of 
the Utility Model Act; Article 44-2 of  the Design Act; Articles 21 and 65-3 
of the Trademark Act; and Article 3 of  the Supplementary Provisions of the 
Trademark Act 
 
Source: Information provided by th e Japanese authorities. 
JPO efforts to improving quality and quantity of patent examination 
139. Japan continued its efforts to address long-standi ng backlogs of patent applications.  Medium 
and long-term goals in the Intellectual Property St rategic Programme 2004, set out pendency of first 
action of less than 30 months in  2008 and 11 months in 2013. 
140. The JPO made efforts to meet these goals, including increasing the number of patent 
examiners and expanding the outsourcing of prior art searches.  The number of patent examiners was increased to 1,711 in 2011, making the JPO one of the world biggest patent offices.  
141. The JPO also improved examination efficiency through a paperless patent examination.  As a 
result, the average number of patent applications  examined by per examiner increased from 220 in 
2008 to 239 in 2010. 
142. In order to cut the backlogs the JPO incr eased outsourcing of prior art searches to non-
governmental search agencies from 178, 000 in 2004 to 242,000 in 2011. 
143. These efforts raised the number of first official actions from 307,665 in 2007 to 363,876 in 
2011, the number of granted patents increased from 146,383 to 220,495.  The backlog of patent 
applications decreased from 888,198 to 448,123 over the same period.  The period of the first action 
pendency was shortened from 28.7 mont hs in 2010 to 25.9 months in 2 011.  However, this is still a 
long way from the target of less than 11 months by 2013. 
144. The JPO has also attempted to improve the qua lity of granted patents, and Japan recognized 
that international cooperation would be crucial in these efforts.  In ternational cooperation between the 
JPO and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (US PTO), European Patent Office (EPO), China State 
Intellectual Property Office (SIPO) and Korea Intellectual Property Office (KIPO) through the 
frameworks of IP5, IP3, and Patent  Prosecution Highway, promote the sharing of the results of prior 
art searches, and help to improve the quality and qu antity of patent examination to a great extent 
(section (f)). 
Designs and utility models 
145. National patent applications for utility model a nd for designs have been declining since 2006, 
which may be attributed to the global economic downturn.  However, there was a small rebound of WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 62 
  
  design applications in 2010, mainly driven by an increase in applications related to electrical and 
electronic equipment and apparatus (Chart III.13) 
05,00010,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,00040,00045,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011Designs
Utility modelsNumber of applicationsChart III.13
Applications for utility mo dels and designs received by the JPO, 2000-11
Source :   WIPO Statistics database. 
146. The JPO also deals with the examination and regi stration of design applications;  most of the 
measures JPO took to improve the quality and quantit y of patent examination also applied to the 
administration of designs.  The Design Act was am ended in line with the amendment of the Patent 
Act in 2011. 
147. In addition, a special accelerated examina tion system for designs was introduced in 
April 2005 in order to combat design counterfeiting.  Under this system, the first action pendency was 
shortened to one month, which e ffectively prevented potential unauthorized use by a third party. 
Trademarks 
148. The number of trademark applications decreased  in 2008 and 2009, with a slight rebound in 
2010 (Chart III.14). 
149. The JPO has made efforts to improve the effici ency of the trademark examination process.  
The first action pendency was reduced from 11 months  in 2000 to 6.2 months in 2003;  after a small 
rebound to 7.9 months in 2008, it decreased to 5.3 months in 2010. 
150. During the review period, the Trademarks Act was amended in line with the amendment of 
the Patent Act.  In addition, several other amendm ents were made to the Trademarks Act to improve 
the efficiency of trademark examination procedur es, including:  (1) abolition of the provision on 
refusal of a trademark application within one year from the date of the extinction of another person's 
trademark right (Article 4(1)(xiii) of the Trademar ks Act);  and (2) abolition of designation of 
exhibitions under the Trademarks Act (Article 4(1)(ix) and Article  9(1) of the Trademarks Act). Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 63 
 
 
  020,00040,00060,00080,000100,000120,000140,000160,000
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Number of applicationsChart III.14
Trademark applications received by the JPO, 2000-10
Source :   WIPO Statistics database.Direct residentDirect non-residentMadrid
 
Geographical indications (GIs) 
151. GIs are protected in Japan under the Trademar ks Act and the Unfair Competition Prevention 
Act.  Additional protection for GIs for wines and spirits, pursuant to Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement, and for Japanese Sake, is admini stered by the National Tax Agency and available 
under the Law Concerning Liquor Business Associ ation and Measures for Securing Revenue from 
Liquor Tax through its Labelling Standard Concerning Geographical Indications. 
152. Japan has no GI registration system.  Th e Commissioner of the National Tax Agency 
designates places where wines, spirits, and Jap anese Sake are produced if the GI fulfils the 
fundamental principle, i.e. that the wines and sp irits possess specific characteristics in quality or good 
reputation and place.  So far, five GIs have been designated for Japanese liquors, including Iki, Kuma, Ryukyu, Satsuma, and Hakusan.  The abuse of GIs is dealt with in court, based on the Unfair 
Competition Prevention Act, on a case-by-case basis. 
(d) Copyright 
153. Copyright-based industries play an increasingly important role in Japan's national economy. 
According to the white papers issued by the Jap anese Copyright Research and Information Centre 
(CRIC), Japanese copyright-based industries accounted for 3.4% in 2007.
99 
154. In 1986, Japan was one of the first few countries to grant the right to copyright owners to 
prohibit the transmission of copyrighted works on the internet without the owner's permission.  The 
same right was later extended to performer s and producers of phonograms, broadcasting 
organizations, and wire diffusion organizations. 
                                                      
99 Japan Copyright Institute (2009). WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 64 
  
  155. In 2009, the Copyright Act was amended to ex tend limitations and exceptions on copyright in 
order to facilitate the use of co pyrighted works over the internet.100 
156. In February 2010, the Government established three committees (the Basic Issues 
Subcommittee, the Legislative Issues Subcommittee, and the International Subcommittee) to discuss 
various copyright issues emerging from the digital age.  These committees attempted to identify legal 
uncertainties in the current copyright system, whic h limited innovation and appl ication of new digital 
technologies, such as cloud computing and data mini ng.  The Legislative Is sues Subcommittee works 
mainly on how to accommodate some unlicensed copy ing through further exte nsion of limitations and 
exceptions to copyright.  In 20 03, Japan issued three free-use ma rks with the purpose of promoting 
smooth distribution of copyrighted works in the in ternet age.  These marks indicate that copyright 
owners allow the free use of their copyri ghted works subject to certain conditions. 
(e) Enforcement 
Overview of IP infringement facing Japanese companies 
157. Counterfeiting and piracy have spread rapidly in recent years, causing increasing trade losses 
and damage to Japanese companies, and undermini ng IP's role of providing economic incentive to 
innovation and economic growth.  Since 1996, the JPO has conducted annual surveys to collect 
information on counterfeit and piracy, in order to facilitate the government's evidence-based 
policymaking. 
158. According to the FY2010 and 2011 survey reports, the number of companies reporting 
infringement of their IPRs worldwide declined fro m 1,059 in 2009 to 944 in 2010.  The authorities 
indicate that losses were caused ma inly by infringement of trademarks (57%), designs (36.1%), 
patents and utility models (33.4%), and copyrigh t work (15.3%);  53.6% of infringement was 
counterfeiting via internet. 
159. China was noted as a main source of IPR infringi ng products.  In 2010, the METI conducted a 
specific survey on Japanese compan ies' losses through IPR infringement in China.  The survey 
showed that 62.9% of the respondent Japanese companies (100 out of 159 companies) had 
experienced IPR infringement in China;  87.4% of  the claimed infringements were related to the 
internet, up from 51.8% in FY2009.  Furthermore, there has been an  increase in claims that Japanese 
trademarks were inappropriately registered in China (from 203 claims in FY2009 to 275 in 
FY2010).101 
Domestic efforts to combat counterfeiting and piracy 
160. The Intellectual Property High Court (IP High C ourt), established in April 2005 as a special 
branch within the Tokyo High Court, inter alia,  hears suits against appeal/trial decisions made by the 
Japan Patent Office (JPO), as the court of first inst ance, and civil cases relating to intellectual property 
as the court of second instance. 
161. The IP High Court consists of a Chief Judge, other judges, judicial research officials of IP 
cases, court clerks, and court secretaries.  Technical advisors may also be involved in IP cases as part-
time officials on a case-by-case basis.  A panel of three judges or the Grand Panel of five judges 
                                                      
100 See CRIC online information.  Viewed at:  www. cric.or.jp/cric_e/multimedia/multimedia.html;  and 
Copyright Law of Japan.  Viewed at:  www.cric.or.jp/cric _e/elj/cl2_1.html. 
101 METI (2011). Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 65 
 
 
  conducts proceedings and renders judgements.  The Grand Panel is set up when a case contains 
important issues and it is deemed a ppropriate to provide unified opinions of the Court without delay.  
Judicial research officials conduct research, by the or der of judges, on technical matters as required to 
conduct proceedings, and render judgements in cases relating to patents, u tility models, and other 
intellectual property.  By decision of the court, technical advisors may assist judges by providing 
technical explanations in cases where their expertise is necessary to clarify issues or facilitate progress 
of the proceedings.  There are more than 200 technical  advisors, with expertis e in various scientific 
fields, including electronics, information communicat ion, biotechnology, chemicals and machinery. 
162. In 2010, 413 suits were initiate d against appeal/trial decisions made by the JPO and 444 were 
terminated.  In the same year, 104 intellectual property appeal cases were commenced and 101 were 
terminated. 
163. The Intellectual Property Protection Office was established at the METI in 2004, with the 
purpose of providing consultation services to industri es that faced IP infringement abroad.  In 2010, 
the Office received 1,563 consultation and requests for information from the industries.  The requests 
mainly concerned trademark infringement in China.102  The Office investigated two claims under the 
IPR Overseas Infringement Investigation Program. 
Border enforcement 164. Border enforcement plays an important role in  preventing IPR infringing goods from entering 
Japan.  In FY2010 and 2011, there were 23,233 and 23,280 cases of seizure/denial of entry at the 
border due to IPR infringement, up from 21,893 in 2009 , while the number of items seized or denied 
entry decreased from 1,044,000 in 2009 to 728,000 in 2011.  This was interpreted as a rapidly 
increasing tendency of IPR infringement:  a postal shipment of IPR-infringing goods into Japan 
(Table III.9). 
Table III.9 
Seizure of imports, 2009-11 
Category Main items 2009 2010 2011
Products concerned ('000 units)  
Shoes Sports shoes 26 166 137 
Accessories Necklaces, rings, charms 80 84 85 
Clothing T-shirts, sweatshirts, jeans 112 45 77 
Bags Handbags, purses 72 46 54 
Medicine Medicine 85 40 53 
Household utensils Thermos bottles, mirror s 28 22 40 
Hats Hats, caps 23 37 29 
Mobile phones and equipment Mobile phone s, and its coverage 15 11 28 
Clothing equipment Zippers 65 48 17 
Computer accessories Computers 14 18 14 
Other Accessories of bags, CDs, watches, key 
cases, electronic appliances, etc. 524 114 194 
Total  1,044 631 728 
Types of violation  
Patent rights  15 9 8 
Utility model rights  0 0 0 
Table III.9 (cont'd)
                                                      
102 The Intellectual Property Protection Office (2011). WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 66 
  
  Category Main items 2009 2010 2011
Design rights  88 56 88 
Trade mark rights  21,415 22,994 22,843 
Copyright (related rights)  423 273 485 
Plant breeders' rights  0 0 1 
Unfair competition  19 1 3 
Total  21,893 23,233 23,280 
Source:  Information provided by the Japanese authorities. 
165. To counter this tendency, the customs aut horities made efforts to apply all the border 
measures required by the TRIPS Agreement to de minimis imports103;  monitored the shipment of 
IPR-infringing products through international post; utilized a Customs Intelligent Database System, 
which enhances the efficiency of the Customs' work;  and provided customs officials with professional training, including an IPR-related training programme. 
166. In addition, in September 2010, Japan hos ted the APEC Customs-Business Dialogues 
(ACBD) and APEC Customs Directors-General/Commissi oners Meeting.  The participants reaffirmed 
their commitment to enhancement of border en forcement on IPRs, especially through improving 
cooperation between Customs and right holders , and among Customs administrations, for the 
progressive implementation of the APEC Model Guidelines to Reduce Trade in Counterfeit and 
Pirated Goods. 
Bilateral cooperation 
167. Since 2002, Japan has concluded 13 economic part nership agreements (EPA) with its trading 
partners, mainly in Asia (Chapter II(2)(ii)).  Most  of these EPAs have an IP section, the main purpose 
of which is to secure adequate, effective, non-di scriminatory, and transparent IP protection and 
enforcement in trade. 
168. China was a main source of IPR infringing products, and in June 2009, the METI and 
Ministry of Commerce of China (MOFCOM) reached the Memorandum of Understanding on Human 
Interactions and Co-operation on IPR Protection,  and agreed to establish the Japan-China IPR 
Working Group.  The Working Group held its second and third annual meetings in 2010 and 2011, to 
exchange information and enha nce cooperation in combatting IP infringement in trade. 
Multilateral cooperation 
169. Japan highlights the importance of IP enforcem ent in various multilateral cooperations, such 
as WTO TRIPS Council, WIPO, APEC, OECD, and G-8. 
170. At the G8 Summit in Gleneagles in 2005, Japan  proposed establishment of a legal framework 
to prevent counterfeiting and piracy.  The pr oposal was echoed by the United States and 
European Union in 2007.  In June 2008, Japan, together with other ten like-minded countries started intensive negotiations on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), with a view to 
establishing an international framework for comba tting counterfeiting and piracy.  The negotiations 
were basically concluded in Oc tober 2010, and the agreement has been open for signature by 
                                                      
103 According to Article 60 of the TRIPS Agreement,  WTO Members may exclude from the application 
of the enforcement provisions small quantities of goods of a non-commercial nature contained in travellers' 
personal luggage or sent in small consignments. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 67 
 
 
  participating countries since 1 May 2011.  On 1 October 2011, Japan hosted a signing ceremony in 
Tokyo and signed the agreement with other seven countries.  
(f) International coopera tion and harmonization 
171. Globalization and the increasing importance of IPRs in the global economy generate a strong 
need for harmonization of IPR systems.  Japan r esolutely pursues its inte rest in international 
harmonization of IP systems, especially patent sy stems, in order to increase Japanese companies' 
international competiveness in global markets.  Efforts have been made through multilateral and 
bilateral cooperation with other countries. 
WIPO 
172. Since it joined WIPO in 1975, Japan has acced ed to 15 international intellectual property 
treaties administered by the WIPO;  it is curren tly a member of seven committees (Table III.10). 
Table III.10 
Membership of WIPO conventions, 2012 
Treaty/Agreement Accession 
Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works 
Paris Act 15 July 1899, 
24 April 1975 
Budapest Treaty on the International Recognition of the Deposit of Microorganisms for the Purposes of 
Patent Procedure 19 August 1980; 
Convention establishing the World Intellectual Prope rty Organization (WIPO Convention) 20 April 1975 
Convention for the Protection of Producers of Phonogr ams against Unauthorized Duplication of Their 
Phonograms (Phonograms Convention) 14 October 1978 
International Convention for the Prot ection of New Varieties of Plants 
(UPOV Convention) and 1978 Act;  1991 Act  3 September 1982;  
24 December 1998 
Madrid Agreement for the Repression of False or De ceptive Indications of Source on Goods (8 July 1953), 
Lisbon Act (21 August 1965), A dditional Act of Stockholm 24 April 1975 
Nice Agreement Concerning the International Classificati on of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the 
Registration of Marks (20 Fe bruary 1990), Geneva Act 20 February 1990 
Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Pr operty (15 July 1899), Stockholm Act, Articles 1 – 12 
(1 October 1975), Stockhol m Act, Articles 13 – 30 24 April 1975 
Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT)  
Protocol Relating to the Madrid Agreement Concerni ng the International Registration of Marks (Madrid 
Protocol) 1 October 1978; 14 March 
2000 
Rome Convention for the Protection of Performe rs, Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting 
Organizations  26 October 1989 
Strasbourg Agreement Concerning the Internati onal Patent Classifica tion  18 August 1977 
Trademark Law Treaty 1 April 1997 
WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) 6 March 2002 
WIPO Performances and Phonogram s Treaty (WPPT)  9 October 2002 
Membership of WIPO committees:  
Advisory Committee on Enforcement (ACE) 
Committee on Development and Intellectual Property (CDIP) 
Committee on WIPO Standards (CWS) Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Tr aditional Knowledge and 
Folklore (IGC) 
Standing Committee on Copyright  and Related Rights (SCCR) 
Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP); and 
Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industr ial Designs and Geographical Indications (SCT)  
 
Source JPO Annual Report, 2011. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 68 
  
  173. Japan plays an active role in international negotiations on the protection of genetic resources 
and associated traditional knowledge , which take place mainly in WIPO IGC, WTO TRIPS Council, 
and Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP).  At the CBD's 
tenth COP meeting (COP 10) in October 2010, pa rties adopted the Nagoya Protocol on Access to 
Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the 
Convention on Biological Diversity (Nagoya Protocol).   The Protocol addresses the fair and equitable 
sharing of the benefits arising from the utilizati on of genetic resources.  The Nagoya Protocol is 
directly relevant to the work of the TRIPS Counc il in examining the relationship between the TRIPS 
Agreement and the CBD.  Japan signed the Nagoya Pr otocol on 11 May 2011, and encouraged other 
WTO countries to implement the Protocol.  In the WTO and WIPO, Japan also proposed to establish a 
comprehensive database system to address errone ous patents in the field of biotechnology. 
The patent prosecution highway (PPH) and PCT-PPH 
174. The PPH is aimed at harmonizing international patent systems, and accelerating procedures.  
The PPH was first introduced by Japan and establis hed between the JPO and USPTO in 2006, in order 
to accelerate patent prosecution by sharing prior ar t search and examination result.  Under the PPH 
framework, once a patent application is determined to  be patentable by the office of first filing, the 
patent applicant may request the search and examinati on information to be shared with another patent 
office, therefore speeding up patent  examination in the second office. 
175. The PPH effectively reduces the duplication of patent examination and prior art searches, and 
therefore accelerates the patent examination procedur es and reduce backlogs of patent applications to 
a great extent.  In 2011, while the average of first action pendency was 25.9 months for national 
patent applications, the average first action pendency for PPH appli cations was 1.8 month.  The PPH 
also enhances the quality of patent  examination and the predictability of patents, as the office of the 
second filing has to consider the results of the first filing office.  
176. Given the advantages of the PPH, the JPO h as made efforts to expand the PPH network.104 
177. In January 2010, a Patent Cooperation Treaty/ Patent Prosecution Highway (PCT/PPH) pilot 
programme was established.  The PPH-PCT applies the PPH prosecution procedure to PCT 
applications.  Under PCT/PPH, once a PCT application is determined to be patentable in the written 
opinion of the International Searching Authorit y or the International Preliminary Examining 
Authority, the PCT applicant may request the accel erated examination procedure at the national 
phase. 
The Trilateral Offices and IP5 
178. The Trilateral Offices is a multilateral coope ration framework established in 1983 between 
the European Patent Office (EPO);  the Japan Pate nt Office (JPO);  and the United States Patent and 
Trademark Office (USPTO).  Patent applications filed and patents granted by these three offices account for about half of overall pate nt applications and granted pate nts.  The main objective of the 
Trilateral Offices is to improve the quality and quan tity of patent examination by harmonizing their 
patent examination process, including data excha nges between three offices, common infrastructure 
                                                      
104 In 2012, 23 countries and regions participated in the PPH framework with Japan:  Austria, Canada, 
China, Chinese Taipei, Denmar k, the EU, Finland, Germany, Hungary, I celand, Israel, the Republic of Korea, 
Mexico, the Nordic Patent Office, No rway, the Philippines, Portugal, Russi a, Singapore, Sp ain, Sweden, the 
United Kingdom, and the United States. Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 69 
 
 
  and compatible database systems, a nd development of an international standard of patent examination 
process. 
179. IP5 is a multilateral framework between the JPO, USPTO, EPO, SIPO and KIPO. These five 
offices process more than 75% of all patent appli cations filed and granted worldwide (Chart III.15). 
Therefore, IP5 has an essential role in intern ational harmonization of patent examination and 
administration. 
Korean Intellectual 
Property Office
8.6%
United States 
Patent & Trademark Office
24.8%Japan 
Patent Office
17.4%Chart III.15
IP5 patent applications and patents granted, 2010
Patent applications to IP5
fiveIPoffices online information.  Viewed at:  http://www.fiveipoffices.org.Patents granted by IP5
Other 
21.8%Korean Intellecual
Property Office
7.6%
Other
22.5%Japan
Patent Office
24.5%State Intellectual 
Property Office of China
14.9%
European 
Patent Office
7.6%
Source:United States Patent & 
Trademark Office
24.2%European 
Patent Office
7.6%State Intellectual 
Property Office of China
19.8%
 
180. The work of the IP5 has been focused on ten foundation projects:  common hybrid 
classification;  common documentation;  common search and examination support tools;  common approach to sharing and documenting search strategi es;  common application format;  mutual machine 
translation;  common access to search and examination results;  common training policy;  common 
examination practice rules and qua lity management;  and common sta tistical parameter system for 
examination.  In April 2010, the IP5 assessed progress on these projects and agreed to accelerate the 
work. 
(v) Competition policy 
(a) Recent developments 
181. The Anti-Monopoly Act (AMA) has remained uncha nged since Japan's previous review.  A 
bill to amend the AMA was submitted to the Diet on March 2010 but has not yet been adopted.  The 
bill seeks to abolish the Japan Fair Trade Commission' s hearing procedure for administrative appeals;  WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 70 
  
  instead, the bill intends to have  the court receive all appeals.105  The bill also seeks to further improve 
hearing procedures within the JFTC prior to issu ing final orders.  The JFTC's budget amounted to 
about ¥9.0 billion in FY2012;  it has 799 officials. 
182. Japan maintains that the JFTC's independen ce is assured under the AMA.  The JFTC is 
administratively attached to the Cabinet Office;  its chairman and the commissioners perform their 
duties independently and cannot be  removed (against their will) during their term of office.  
(b) Exemptions from the AMA prohibition of cartels 
183. Since the previous Trade Policy Review of Japan, no changes have been made to the 
Anti-monopoly Act exemptions (Table AIII.2). 
(c) Holding companies, and mergers and acquisitions 
184. Chapter 4 of the AMA prohibits mergers and acquis itions if they lead to a substantial restraint 
on competition.106  On 1 July 2011, the JFTC abolished th e "prior consultation system", under which 
companies consulted with the JFTC, prior to filing the statutory notification, on whether merger and 
acquisition plans raised concerns under Chapter 4 of the Antimonopoly Act.  Under the new system, 
mergers and acquisitions that meet certain thresholds  are reviewed under the statutory procedure after 
notification.  Since 2011, there have been no changes to restrictions on the holding of stocks by large-
scale companies in excess of their own capital or net assets. 
185. A company must submit a business report to the JFTC, within three months of the end of each 
business year, if the total assets of the company a nd its subsidiaries exceed specified thresholds:  
¥600 billion for a holding company, ¥8 trillion fo r a financial company, and ¥2 trillion for other 
companies.107  In FY2011, 100 business reports were  submitted under Section 9 of the AMA 
(33 holding companies), up from 92 (29 holding compan ies) in FY2010.  There was no notification of 
establishment of new holding companies under Section 9 in FY2011 (2 in FY2010). 
(d) International arrangements 
186. Japan participates in OECD committees a nd working groups established to increase 
cooperation in competition policy;  it also par ticipates in the activities of the International 
Competition Network (ICN), APEC, and UNCTAD.  Most of Japan's FTAs/EPAs provide for each 
party to take appropriate measures against anti-co mpetitive activities in accord ance with its laws and 
regulations, and to cooperate in controlling anti-competitive activities, e.g. by notifying the other 
party of enforcement activities, cooperation, coordi nation, requests for enforcement activities, and 
consideration of the other party's interests.108  Japan has three other bilateral cooperation agreements 
on anti-competitive activities, with Canada, the European Union, and the United States.   
                                                      
105 JFTC online information.  Viewed at:  http:// www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleases/archives/individual-
000030.html [21.08.2012]. 
106 "Substantial restraint" on competition is when a market structure changes as a result of a merger, 
and specific companies can control the market by influe ncing variables such as price, quality, and quantity. 
107 A newly established company that corresponds to any of these thresholds must submit a notification 
to the JFTC, for its approval, within 30 days of establishment. 
108 EPAs with:  Peru, Chapter 12;  India, Chapter 11;  Switzerland, Chapter 10;  Viet Nam, Chapter 10;  
Indonesia, Chapter 11;  Thailand, Chapter 12;  Chile, Chapter 14;  the Philippines, Chapter 12;  Malaysia Japan WT/TPR/S/276 
 Page 71 
 
 
  (e) Enforcement 
187. An investigation into possible violations of the AMA may be initiated as a result of:  a report 
from the general public, detection by the JFTC itself, notification by the Small and Medium 
Enterprise Agency, or a report by leniency applican ts.  The AMA provides three types of measures to 
penalize and thereby deter violations of the Act:  administrative measures,  such as surcharges and 
orders to take "elimination measures" (ceas e and desist orders);  criminal penalties109;  and private 
damages actions (Table III.11). 
Table III.11 
Enforcement of competition policy, 2007-11 
Details Fiscal year 
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011  
(A)  Legal measures taken against acts prohibited by the Anti-monopoly Act  
Number of legal measures 24 17 26 12 22 
Private monopolization 0 1 0 0 0 
Cartels 20 11 22 10 17 
Price cartels 6 8 5 6 5 
Collusive tendering 14 2 17 4 12 
Other types of cartela 0 1 0 0 0 
Unfair trading practices 3 5 4 2 5 
Others 1 0 0 0 0 
(B)  Surcharge payment orders      
Number of cases 20 10 21 15 20 
Number of company operators 165 59 85 152 280 
Surcharge amount (in ¥ billion) 11.29 27.03 36.07  72.08 44.25 
Decisions to initiate hearings 2 2 0 2 3 
(C)  Recently processed investigation cases      
Cases investigated      
Carry-overs from the previous fiscal year 28 18 19 22 23 
New cases begun during the current fiscal year 132 124 133 143 157 
Total 160 142 152 165 180 
Cases processed      
Legal measures      
Cease and desist orders 22 16 26 12 22 
Surcharge payment ordersb 2 1 0 0 0 
Sub-total 24 17 26 12 22 
Table III.11 (cont'd) 
                                                                                                                                                                     
Chapter 10;  Mexico, Chapter 12;  and Singapore, Chapter 12.  There is no chapter on competition in the EPAs 
with ASEAN or Brunei. 
109 Criminal penalties include imprisonment of up to five years or a fine of up to ¥5 million for private 
monopolies and unreasonable restraint of trade, and imprisonment of up to two years or a fine of up to 
¥3 million for international agreements constituting unreas onable restraint of trade and unfair trade practices, 
restrictions of the number of members of trade associations, and violations of final decisions by the JFTC.  
Criminal proceedings may be initiated only after an accusa tion is filed by the JFTC with the Public Prosecutor 
General.  Appeals are available in the high  courts and eventually the Supreme Court. WT/TPR/S/276 Trade Policy Review 
Page 72 
  
  Details Fiscal year 
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011  
Others      
Warnings 10 4 9 3 2 
Cautions 88 87 69 95 138 
Discontinued casesc 20 15 26 32 9 
Sub-total 118 106 104 130 149 
Total 142 123 130 142 171 
Carry-overs to the next fiscal year 18 19 22 23 9
Criminal accusations 1 1 0 0 0 
 
a Including restrictions on sales volume and restrictions on business clients. 
b Surcharge payment orders were made without  a recommendation or cease and desist order. 
c Discontinued due to lack of evidence of wrong-doing.  
Source:  Information provided by the Japanese authorities.