WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION  
ORGANISATION MONDIALE DU COMMERCE  
ORGANIZACIÓN MUNDIAL DEL COMERCIO   
WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
14 June 2013 
 (13-3058) 
Trade Policy Review Body 19 and 21 February 2013 Original: English/Spanish 
  anglais/espagnol 
 inglés/español 
 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW 
JAPAN 
Record of the Meeting 
Addendum 
Chairperson:  H.E. Mr. Shahid Bashir (Pakistan) 
 This document contains the advance writte n questions, and replies provided by Japan.1 
__________________________________________________________________________________ 
Organe d'examen des politiques commerciales 
19 et 21 février 2013 
 
EXAMEN DES POLITIQUES COMMERCIALES 
JAPON 
Compte rendu de la réunion 
Addendum 
Président:  S.E. M. Shahid Bashir (Pakistan) 
 
 Le présent document contient les questions  écrites communiquées à l'avance et les réponses 
fournies par le Japon.1 
__________________________________________________________________________________  Órgano de Examen de la s Políticas Comerciales 
19 y 21 de febrero de 2013 
 
EXAMEN DE LAS POLÍTICAS COMERCIALES 
JAPÓN 
Acta de la reunión 
Addendum 
Presidente:  Excmo. Sr. Shahid Bashir (Pakistan) 
 
 En el presente documento figuran las pr eguntas presentadas anticipadamente por escrito, 
junto con las respuestas facilitadas por el Japón.1 
                                                 
 1 In English and Spanish only./En anglais et espagnol seulement./En inglés y español solamente.  
    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 3 
 
 
 1. UKRAINE 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW 
JAPAN 
QUESTIONS FROM UKRAINE 
 
Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/276) 
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE (1) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS (ii) Tariffs 
(b) Applied MFN tariff 
 
Paragraph 10 of this section notes that “the non- ad valorem rates of duty (6.6% of all 
tariff lines) apply mainly to fats and oils, foot wear, prepared foods, live animals and animal 
products, textiles and clothing, ve getables, and mineral products”. 
 
According to the paragraph and footnote 7 to this section, non- ad valorem duties 
include specific; compound; alternate; differential; and sliding duties.  
 
Question:  Could Japan kindly explain what is the rationale for maintenance and 
application of these different types of duties,  and are there any plans to move towards 
introduction of a more transparent ad valorem rate of duty? 
 
RESPONSE:  In Japan, tariff rates are applied to resp ective products appropriately, taking into 
consideration the status of re levant domestic sectors. Japan has at present no such plan as 
indicated in the question. 
 
According to paragraph 13 of the section, “t he simple average rate for all the AVEs 
supplied is 37.7%; however, the highest rate is  515.6%, for certain beans and cow peas. Of the 
100 highest tariffs, 95 had non- ad valorem rates”.  
 Besides, the paragraph notes that “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 advant ages, such as administrative simplicity”. 
 
Question:  Could Japan kindly elaborate on other advantages of non-ad valorem rates 
of duty that restrain Japan’s Government from transition to ad valorem tariffs? Does Japan 
agree that non-ad valorem rates can be  used to conceal tariff peaks? 
 
RESPONSE: In general, non-ad valorem tariffs are a pplied to certain products due to certain 
advantages including, as with specific duties,  duty amounts being easily calculated with 
numbers or weight of imported goods, thereb y keeping down administrative cost. Japan has 
applied an appropriate type of tariffs for each  product in accordance with the product’s property. 
Thus, Japan does not agree, at least in the cont ext of Japan’s tariff policy, that non-ad valorem 
rates are used to conceal tariff peaks.  
Tariff reductions and exemptions 
 
Paragraph 14 notes that “in FY2011, cust oms duty reductions and exemptions 
amounted to ¥187 billion (about 21.3% of tariffs actually collected)”. 
 
Question:  Could Japan kindly indicate to what goods did such reductions and 
exemptions apply, as well as origin of goods imported duty-free or at a reduced rate, and WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 4 
 
 
 explain reasons for these measures (investment  incentives, implementation of infrastructure 
projects etc)?  
 
RESPONSE:  Customs duty reductions or exemptions are applied in accordance with the 
Customs Tariff Law and other related laws. 
The actual amounts in FY2011 of reduction and exemption for raw materials for manufacturing use based on Article 13 of Customs Tariff Law and for products manufactured from goods exported for processing or assembling based on Article 8 of Temporary Tatiff Measure Law accounted for more than 90% of the total amount (187 billion). 
They are implemented in response to admi nistrative demands for the introduction of 
economical, social or educational measures, etc., and in other cases implemented from the 
standpoint of observing international prac tices or courtesy to foreign countries. 
[Articles that apply] Article 10,11,12,13,14,14-2,14-3,15,16,17,18,19,19-2 of Customs Tariff Law 
 
(v) State trading 
 
According to paragraph 27, “state-trading activities in Japan involve leaf tobacco, 
opium, rice, wheat and barley, and milk products . The authorities maintain that the underlying 
reason for state-trading activities is to stabili ze the supply and price of these commodities and 
protect consumer interests. However, the prices of these commodities in Japan tend to be higher 
than the world price”. 
 
Question:  Because of the discrepancy between th e stated reason for state-trading and 
the outcome and impact of this policy on consum ers, does Japan plan any improvements to the 
existing state-trading system or the replacement of state-trading enterprises by private 
operators?  
 
RESPONSE: Japan has no plan to review the current state-trading system. 
 
(vii) Government procurement 
 
According to paragraph 32 of this section, “…it would appear that government 
procurement is also used as an instrument of industrial policy for some sectors and to support 
SMEs”. 
Paragraph 42 of this section also notes that “Procurement from SMEs is 
“encouraged”…; under the Law, the Government, local authorities, and other public agencies 
must endeavour to expand procurem ent opportunities for SMEs, by way of, inter alia, providing 
information on procurement plans. Nonetheless, no tendering is reserved exclusively for SMEs. 
These laws and regulations apply equall y to domestic and foreign SMEs”. 
 
Question:  Could Japan kindly explain what concrete preferences and support are given 
to SMEs and what requirements should be met by  SMEs to be eligible for such support? 
 
REPONSE:  In accordance with the Act on Ensuri ng the Receipt of Orders from the 
Government and Other Public Agencies by Sm all and Medium-sized Enterprise and government 
contract guidelines, the central government a nd other public agencies endeavor to expand 
opportunities for SMEs to receive order from them , by way of, inter alia, providing information 
concerning procurements.   The definition of SMEs in Japan is below; http://www.chusho.meti.go.jp/sme_e nglish/outline/08/01_01.html 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 5 
 
 
 Paragraph 39 of the section states that “i n accordance with an announcement 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. 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 domest ic and imported goods.” 
 
Question:  Could Japan kindly inform of con crete results of the announced program, 
and, in particular, indicate the present share of imported wood in domestic demand for these 
products? 
 
RESPONSE:  The aim of the “Act for the Promotion of  Use of Wood in Public Buildings” is to 
boost the use of wood in public buildings, regardless of its country of origin. Thus, this Act is 
implemented without distinguishing between dom estic and imported wood, and there is no data 
such as the share of products used in public build ings with respect to their country of origin.  
 IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR (1) AGRICULTURE  (i) Structure 
 Paragraph 4 of this section notes that “the agriculture sector continues to receive 
substantial government support, comprising, inter alia, a relatively higher average MFN applied 
rate compared with other sectors; tariff quotas;  income support; and, in some subsectors, 
production controls.” 
 Question:  Since this substantial support has been provided for years, could Japan 
kindly elaborate on the recent impact of these polic ies on the development of agricultural sector 
(output, employment, farmers’ income and standar d of living, development of rural areas etc)? 
 
RESPONSE:  The government’s efforts to revitalize th e sector have yielded concrete results, 
such as; 
 
－ increase in the size of managed farmland (from 1995 to 2011, average farmed area of crops 
increased by 1.3 fold, dairy farms by 1.6 fold and hog farms by 3 fold) 
－ consolidation of farmland (the share of farm land cultivated by persons principally engaged 
in farming increased from 28% in 2000 to 49% in 2010) 
－ increase in sales by individual farmers (the share of farmers who annually sell more than 10 
million yen increased from 6.2% in 1995 to 7.4% in 2010).  
 
According to paragraph 4 of this section,  “support is provided mainly through market 
price support; in addition, relatively high tariffs  and production restrictions are in place, which 
lead to higher price”, and paragraph 5 notes that  “consumer prices of agricultural products in 
Japan are considerably higher  than the OECD average”. 
 
Question:  Does Japan take any measures intended to reduce consumer prices of 
agricultural products to improve access of th e population to affordable and nutritious food?  
 RESPONSE: Japan does not take any measure aimed at  the reduction of consumer prices of 
agriculture products.  
(ii) Border measures 
Paragraph 8 of this section notes that “out of 314 tariff lines that have a non- ad valorem 
rate under “WTO Agriculture”, AVEs were not available for 102 lines at the HS nine-digit WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 6 
 
 
 level; these include milk and dairy products, live sw ine and meat of swine, rice and cereals, fruit 
juices, groundnuts and their oil, and prepared foods . For example, the rate payable on imports of 
Bambara beans, cow peas, and Pegin beans is am ong the highest in Japan’s customs tariff, with 
an ad valorem equivalent of 515.6% (out-of-quota rate). Tariffs tend to be particularly high and 
variable for vegetables, cereals, a nd sugars and suga r confectionery.” 
 
Footnote 6 to this section states that “accordi ng to the authorities, the lack of estimates 
of AVEs may be due to low world production and international trade volume of certain 
products, and low demand for them in Japan. Th e absence of estimates because of no imports 
may suggest that tariffs for the pr oducts concerned are prohibitive. 
 
Question:  Could Japan kindly clarify whether th e absence of AVEs for cereals, milk, 
dairy produce, meat of swine and other mentione d products means that tariffs for these goods 
are prohibitive or there are other reasons for this?  
RESPONSE: Japan sets an appropriate tariff rate on each product, consistently with WTO 
Agreements, taking into consideration th e status of respective domestic sectors. 
 
Paragraph 9 notes that “in-quota imports of rice, wheat and barley, and certain milk 
products are handled mainly by state-trading entities; certain amounts of these products may be 
imported by private entities”. 
 
Question:  Could Japan kindly elaborate on requirements  to be met by private entities in 
order to import the mentioned products? What volumes of these goods were imported by private 
entities in 2010-2012 and what was the share of those imports in the total imports of these 
commodities? 
 
RESPONSE:  Almost the entire volume of rice, wheat, barley and a certain portion of dairy 
products are imported through state trading. Part of rice, wheat and barley for specific use, and all TRQ dairy products except “d esignated dairy products for ge neral use” can only be imported 
by private entities certificated by the Minister  of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. 
 
For instance, the volume of in-quota imports of  rice, wheat and barley by private entities are 
shown as below. For the details of other produc ts, please refer to the tariff quota notification 
(MA:2) (2010:G/AG/N/JPN/174, 2011:G/AG/N/JPN/184 ).  
According to paragraph 14 of this secti on, “the Government has programmes to 
promote exports of food and agricultural, forestry, and fishery products. It has targeted these to 
reach ¥1 trillion yen by 2020. The authorities state that this is to be achieved by: requesting importing countries to set risk management measures regarding the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident; implementing strategic marketing under the “Japan Brand”; and increasing the appeal of Japan’s food culture to the rest of the world”. 
 
Question:  Could Japan kindly provide more deta ils on these programs, in particular, 
the Government’s involvement in and support, including financial contribution (amount, annual 
distribution among sectors, eligibility etc), for these programs?  
 
RESPONSE: 
1) The details on these programs are:  
・encouraging importing countries, based on scientific grounds, to ease or lift their import 
restrictions on Japanese food products;   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 7 
 
 
 ・intensifying marketing efforts such as market research and establishing the ‘Japan Brand’ by 
supporting the marketing activities by associations of exporters, agricultural cooperatives and 
processed food manufacturers, etc;  
・dissemination of Japanese food culture by short movies and other PR activities; 
・setting up Japan pavilions at international exhibitions. 
 
2) The budget for the export promotion of Japanese food products, including TV and online 
publicity on the safety of Japanese food in res ponse to the nuclear power plant accident, is 
2.3 billion yen in FY2011 and 2.2 billion yen in FY2012, and is available for agriculture, 
forestry and fishery producers as well as processed food producers. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 8 
 
 
 2. SWITZERLAND 
 
WTO/TPR/JP 
Questions of Switzerland 
Report by the Secretariat 
II.  Trade Policy Regime: Framework and Objectives 
(1) Trade Policy Objectives 
(ii) Transparency and policy evaluation 
 
In para. 8 , the Secretariat's report notes that since 2007, draft laws or draft cabinet orders to enact, 
revise or abolish regulations must be evaluated by ex-ante regulatory impact analyses (RIAs), the 
results of which must be published.  The Secret ariat's report notes further that not all bills are 
subject to ex-ante RIAs, for example an ex-ante RIA was not conducted on the draft bill on the reform of the Japan Post Office. Additionally,  existing regulations and measures that are not 
subject to amendment or abolition are not subject to  ex-ante RIAs. Thus, the costs and benefits of 
protection from other trade policy measures are not evaluated by the Government. Could the 
Japanese authorities indicate if there is a differen ce in the obligation to undertake RIAs between 
primary laws and secondary legislation ? Are th e resources for RIAs targeted on the most 
important subjects ?   
RESPONSE:  Ex-ante regulatory impact analyses are conducted concerning the policies 
prescribed by No. 6, Article 3 of Cabinet Or der for Enforcement of the Government Policy 
Evaluation Act. 
URL： http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_content/000082217.pdf  
 
In para. 9 , the Secretariat report notes that sever al bodies inside the governement undertake 
independent evaluations of the policies impl emented by ministries. Could the Japanese 
authorities indicate how they ensure that evaluations are conducted on the most important policies ? Are the evaluations coordinated between the different ministries ?  RESPONSE:  In selecting policies for evaluation to ensure coherence/comprehensiveness, the 
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications  (MIC) does not only take into consideration 
the result of investigations and deliberations  undertaken by the advisory committee, the 
Commission on Policy Evaluation and Evaluation of Incorporated Administrative Agencies, but 
also solicits comments from the public.   
The Ministry of Finance has surveyed expenditure  since FY 2002, in order to review the annual 
budget and to implement it effectively. The Public Project Review (PPR) is a scheme for project-level (project is a subordinate concept 
of the policy) self-inspection by ministries, and the Government Revitalization Unit (GRU) 
conducts its independent assessm ent to ensure appropriate self-inspection by ministries. 
 
In the fulfillment of the role of policy evaluation as a whole of government, the ministries and the review organizations c ooperate with each other. 
 In addition, The GRU and the MIC cooperated a nd coordinated with each other to implement 
the PPR and the Policy Evaluation. 
 
＊The GRU was abolished after the change of government in December 2012. Future 
implementation methods and the form of the PPR will be discussed at newly-established 
Administrative Reform Promotion Council.    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 9 
 
 
 In para. 11 , the Secretariat's report notes that for  draft regulations, the public can make 
comments during a period of 30 days. Do the Japanese authorities consider  that time frame as 
sufficient, if one considers that some groups  may not have enough available resources to 
analyze all new draft regulations ? Is this time frame extended during holiday periods ? Are 
there plans to allow the public to make also comments on draft laws ?  (see also footnote 8  of 
the Secretariat's report)  RESPONSE:  From the viewpoint of harmonizing the re quest to guarantee the effectiveness of 
the Public Comment Procedure (PCP) with the n eed to prevent stagnation in administrative 
operations caused by imposing an excessive burde n on the Organs Establishing Administrative 
Orders, etc., the Administrative Procedure Act (A PA) stipulates that the period for submission of 
Comments shall be “30 days or more” (i.e. including holidays).  Draft laws are not subject to PCP under the APA.  Currently, no movement to revise the APA can 
be seen. 
 
(2) Trade Agreements and Arrangements 
(iii) Generalized System of Preferences and other preferential arrangements adopted 
 unilaterally by Japan  
In para. 18 , the Secretariat's report notes that  Japan grants preferential tariff treatment under its 
GSP scheme to 138 developing countries and 7 territories for 409 agricultural and fishery products, and 3,147 industrial products  at HS 9-digit level.  Numerous agricultural products and 
some industrial products are excluded (e.g. rice and rice products, meat and meat products, fish, 
dairy products, pineapples, cerea l products, textiles and clothing, leather and leather products, and 
footwear).  Many of the excluded products are e xport items in which developing countries have a 
comparative advantage.  Could the Japanese authorities indicate the rate of use of its GSP 
scheme ? This ratio is given by the actual impor ts under the regime as a part of total potential 
imports under the regime.   RESPONSE: Under Japan’s GSP scheme, total GSP-c overed imports in FY2011 amounted to 
1,015 billion yen, accounting for 11.9% of the to tal imports for dutiable goods from all the GSP 
beneficiaries amounting to 8,513 billion yen. (Note: Japan’s fiscal year starts in April and ends in March of the following year.) 
 
Also Table II.2  shows that almost three quarters of the total imports under the Japanese GSP 
are originating in China. Have the Japan ese authorities initiated a reflection on how better 
incentives could be granted in order to achieve a more balanced distribution of the benefits of 
the system among GSP beneficiaries?  RESPONSE: In 2011, Japan revised the measure that excludes application from the GSP 
scheme of import items from GSP beneficiaries on a country/item basis, in order to make the 
criteria more objective and transparent. 
 The revision excluded certain import items from China, allowing less-competitive developing 
countries to benefit more from GSP benefits under Japan's GSP scheme. 
 
III.  Trade Policies and Practices by Measure  
(1) Measures Directly Affecting Imports 
(viii) Standards, technical regulations , and sanitary and phytosanitary measures 
(b) Sanitary and phytosanitary measures 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 10 
 
 
 In para. 65 , the Secretariat's report describes that Japan decided to review its general 
countermeasures against BSE. These countermeasu res include an import ban for beef from a 
number of countries, including Switzerland. For two countries – the United States and Canada – 
the import ban has been lifted already in 200 5 for certain types of  beef under certain 
conditions. The report describes that currently a risk assessment of beef from four countries 
(United States, Canada, France and Netherlands ) is conducted. Based on the described risk 
assessment, according to the report, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welf are is to review the 
countermeasures against BSE. What has based th e decision to choose the four countries for 
which the risk assessment is conducted ? Once the d ecision to lift the import ban on beef is to be 
made, how will Japan ensure that it will not be discriminating between different countries where 
the same conditions prevail with regard to th eir risk status in OIE such as countries like 
Switzerland?   RESPONSE:  Before lifting of a ban on beef import from BSE affected countries, the Ministry 
of Health Labour and Welfare (MHLW) requests the Food Safety Commission (FSC) that is the 
risk assessment body in Japan to conduct a risk assessment for each country. 
 The SPS Agreement requires that the sanitary or phytosanitary measures conducted by WTO 
Members are based on scientific principles. MHLW  requests risk assessment to the FSC taking 
into account the OIE evaluation. 
 
Regarding  the four countries (the USA, Canada, France and the Netherlands), MHLW requested the FSC to conduct risk assessment, as the data required for the risk assessment had 
been submitted. Switzerland and other BSE affected countries are e xpected to be subject to the same procedure 
as above four countries, as soon as the require d data for risk assessment is prepared. 
 (2)  Measures Affecting Production and Trade 
(v)  Competition policy 
(d) International arrangements 
 In para. 186 , the Secretariat's report notes that Jap an participates in OECD committees and 
working groups established to increase cooperation in  competition policy;  it also participates 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-competitive 
activities in accordance with its laws and re gulations, and to cooperate in controlling 
anti-competitive activities, e.g. by notifying the other party of enforcement activities, 
cooperation, coordination, requests for enforcem ent activities, and consideration of the other 
party's interests. The EPA Japan-Switzerland also foresees far reaching provisions on 
cooperation. Could the Japanese authorities indicate how useful such provisions are according to 
their experience and how often they have made use of them ?  
RESPONSE:  The Japan Fair Trade Commission conducts co-ordination and co-operation 
regarding enforcement activities as a part of in ternational co-operation with foreign competition 
authorities. These activities have been undertak en based on legal co-operation mechanisms 
pursuant to the EPA/FTAs and other agreements and it indicates the effectivity of such legal 
frameworks. Some of the examples of such in ternational co-operation are given in the link 
below.   
(Reference) http://search.oecd.org/officialdocuments/dis playdocumentpdf/?cote=DAF/COMP/GF/WD%282
012%2942&docLanguage=En  
 
(e) Enforcement 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 11 
 
 
 In footnote  109 to para. 187 , the Secretariat's report notes that criminal penalties in case of 
violations of the Anti-Monopoly Act (AMA) 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 unreasonable restraint of trade and unfai r trade practices, restrictions of the number 
of members of trade associations, and violations of final decisions by the JFTC. While the penalties with respect to imprisonment in case of violations of the AMA appear quite deterent, the fines of a maximum of only ¥5 million (about US$56,000.-) seem on the contrary rather lenient. Could the authorities explain the reasons  why these fines have been set at such a low 
level compared to the imprisonment penalti es in case of violations of the AMA? 
 RESPONSE: In Japan, many other laws concerning white -collar crimes stipulate “a fine of not 
more than five million yen” corresponding to “imprisonment with work for not more than five years” as the criminal penalty for a natural person,  therefore the fines for a natural person under 
the AMA are not disproportionate with the imprisonment penalties.  IV.  Trade Policies by Sector 
(1) Agriculture 
(i) Structure 
 
In para. 4 , the Secretariat's report indicates that market  price support is the main instrument of 
Japanese agricultural policy. However in the la test DS:1 Notification Japan notifies some 
environmental programs as well as regional assistance programs. Do the Japanese authorities consider a policy shift towards more programs that are in conformity with the Green Box 
criteria? 
 
RESPONSE:  Japan has introduced direct payments to farmers in the hilly and mountainous 
area and payments to conserve and improve land , water and the environment, etc., for ensuring 
the multi-functionality of agriculture, while havi ng abolished government procurement of rice 
for market price support in 1998. Japan will c ontinue to pursue the structural reform of 
agriculture while ensuring its multi-functiona lity, in accordance with the WTO Agreement on 
Agriculture. 
 (ii) Border Measures 
 
In para. 9 , the Secretariat's report describes that the fill rates of the 18 tariff quotas vary. The 
fill rate for some tariff quotas, such as ‘butter and butter oil’ but also ‘skimmed milk powder for 
other purposes’ are particularly low. In para. 9 , the report also indicates that in-quota imports of 
certain milk products are mainly handled by stat e-trading entities. Is this  also the case for the 
quota for ‘skimmed milk powder for other purposes’ ? What are, for the Japanese authorities the 
reason(s) for the low fill rate of this tariff-quot a ? Has Japan any plans to take measures that 
could help to increase the fill-rate of its tari ff-quotas? Is Japan considering a scheme where it 
would be reallocating unused quotas ? 
 RESPONSE: Among TRQs for dairy products, the TRQ for “designated dairy products for 
general use” (for example, butter and skim milk po wder) is subject to state-trading.  All the 
other TRQs on dairy products are for private importers, including “skimmed milk powder for 
other purposes”. This TRQ has been under-filled as  the domestic consumption related to this 
TRQ has been declining.  Concerning unused quotas, a scheme of rea llocation has already been implemented. 
All the TRQ are operated in consistent with th e WTO agreements and Japan’s tariff schedule. 
 
(3) Manufacturing WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 12 
 
 
  
In para. 38 , the Secretariat's report indicates that the Enterprise Turnaround Initiative 
Corporation of Japan (ETIC), established in 2009 under the Enterprise Turnaround Initiative 
Corporation Act, is authorized to provide fi nancial support to companies and businesses that are 
deemed to have revitalization potential a nd are highly indebted, including those in 
manufacturing. Could the Japanese authorities indicate on the basis of what criteria the Enterprise Turnaround Initiative Corporation of  Japan (ETIC) deems that the supported 
companies and businesses have revitalization potential ? 
 
RESPONSE: The criteria the ETIC uses to deem that the supported companies and businesses 
have revitalization potential include the following :  1. The business has prospects for meeting “Pro ductivity Improvement Standards” (Note 1) and 
“Financial Soundness Standards” (Note 2) within thr ee years. Furthermore, if the applicant is an 
SME, the period of time within which the applican t is required to meet such standards may be 
extended. 
 2. In cases where the ETIC makes debt purchase, lo ans, guarantees to applicant’s debt and/or 
capital injection, it is possible to dispose of th e credit, shares or other items related to the 
applicant within three years of the decision to provide support 
 
(Note 1) Productivity Improvement Standards:  One of the following conditions should be met: a. Increase in the return on equity of two percentage points or more b. Increase in the tangible fixed asset turnover of five percentage points or more 
c. Increase in the amount of added value per employee of six percentage points or more 
d. Improvement in other indicators showing a rise in productivity equivalent to the above 
 (Note 2) Financial Soundness Standards: All of the following conditions should be met: e. Ratio of interest-bearing debt (minus quasi-cap ital subordinated loan, if any) to cash flow less 
than ten times 
f. Recurring income greater than recurring expenditure  (4) Energy and Utilities 
 
In para. 41 , the Secretariat's report indicates that in 2012, the Electricity Business Act and the 
Gas Business Law were amended with a view to relaxing regulation on tariffs in order to, inter 
alia, incorporate a feed-in-tariff (FIT) system for certain renewable energy;  both amendments replaced the approval requirement with a notifica tion requirement on certain tariffs. Could the 
Japanese authorities explain how the feed-in tariff (FIT) system for certain renewable energy is 
going to be financed? In case it will be financed through a levy on the end user price of 
electricity, could Japan elaborate on the additional burden on industry, and whether some sort of 
exemption mechanisms are going to be provid ed , e.g. for energy intensive enterprises facing 
international competition?  RESPONSE: We newly made the “Act on Special Measures Concerning Procurement of 
Electricity from Renewable Energy Sourced by  Electricity Utilities” to introduce the feed-in 
tariff (FIT) system. The cost is financed through  a levy on the end user price of electricity. 
Electricity-intensive enterprises that meet some conditions can enjoy the 80% surcharge 
exemption.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 13 
 
 
 3. SINGAPORE 
WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM SINGAPORE 
 
PART I:  QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SECRETARIAT REPORT 
II TRADE POLICY REGIME: FRAMEWORK AND OBJECTIVES 
 
QUESTIONS: 
 
Foreign Investment Regime 
Page 19 (Para 32) and Page 20 (Para 35)  
 
1. With regard to para 35 of the “Forei gn Investment Regime” section of the 
Secretariat’s Report, Singapore is heartened to no te the reforms that Japan has taken for prior 
notifications to reduce the burden on foreign investors. Singapore hopes that Japan continues to work towards greater facilitation of investme nt in Japan. With regard to para 32 of the 
same section, Singapore notes that Japan’s tradin g partners had indicated in the past that the 
continued low level of FDI could be due to (i ) impediments to mergers and acquisitions, (ii) 
insufficient regulatory reform and financial transparency and flexibility, (iii) and lack of 
flexibility in the labour market.  Singapore would appreciate it if Japan could elaborate on plans to address these issues.  RESPONSE: The Government of Japan has implemented a variety of policies to give 
incentives to inward FDI (please see below for examples), including those dealing with some 
of the issues Singapore points out. Those po licies are summarized as the "Program for 
Promoting Japan as an Asian Business Center and Direct Invest into Japan" (December 2011). http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program.pdf 
The follow-up of the Program was conducted in June 2012. 
http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program-followup.pdf  
 
[Examples of the incentives and policies included in the Program] 
- Location subsidies for both domestic and foreign businesses alike based on the 
non-discriminatory principle (applications in English is possible) 
- Corporate tax breaks for global businesses 
- Reduction of the effective corporate tax rate 
- Exceptions to regulations as well as tax,  fiscal and financial incentives in the 
Comprehensive Special Zones 
- 5-year exemption from the corporate tax for businesses newly set up in the Recovery 
Special Zone 
- Building social capital including airports and seaports 
- New foreign residence management system for increasing convenience for foreign 
nationals 
 
In addition, In order to show Japan’s willi ngness to welcome FDI into Japan, the Government 
of Japan is working on proactive public rela tions through its diplomatic missions overseas 
and Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO)’s overseas offices.  Page 20 (Para 39) 
 2. Singapore would like to clarify whether under the Special Zone for Reconstruction 
and Comprehensive Special Zone System, all firm s would be exempt from regulations and be 
provided with fiscal and financial incentives? Si ngapore would also appreciate further details 
about this initiative. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 14 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  As to the Special Zone for Reconstruc tion, all firms that conduct business in an 
industrial sector described in the approved r econstruction plan in a Special Zone for 
Reconstruction Industry Clusters  determined by municipalities are eligible for the special 
measures under the Special Zone for Reconstruction system, regardless of the nationality of 
the firm owner or organization type. 
 The aforementioned special measures include tho se of tax, regulations / procedures, finance 
as well as land use restructuring. They take effect upon the approval by the central government of the Plans for Special Zone for Reconstruction develope d by local governments 
in the areas disrupted by the disaster. Please refer to the website below for the contents of the 
special measures provided under the Special Zone for Reconstruction; http://www.reconstruction.go.jp/english/t opics/outline%20of%20Special%20Zone%20for%2
0Reconstruction.pdf 
 
As to the Comprehensive Special Zones (CSZ), al l firms that conduct relevant projects in the 
CSZ are eligible for the special measures unde r the CSZ system under designated conditions, 
regardless of the nationality of the firm owner or organization type.  Under the CSZ system, the Government of Japan allows regulatory exceptions as well as tax, fiscal and financial supports to pioneering efforts that deal with local issues and lead to 
economic revitalization. Please refer to the att ached material for the contents of special 
measures provided under CSZ system.  III TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
Measures Directly Affecting Imports 
Page 22 (Para 3 & 4) 
 
3. With reference to Chapter III, Section (1)(i ), paragraphs 3 and 4 on the time release 
survey, we would appreciate it if Japan can sh are with us the average clearance times of 
goods (i) imported by Japan AEOs and (ii) imported into Japan from AEOs of their MRA partners. In addition, we would like to check  if Japan conducts time release surveys on 
export. If yes, we would appreciate it if Japan can share with us the methodology and 
parameters used.  RESPONSE: 1 As to the imports under the Japan’s Authorized Economic Operator (AEO) 
program, according to the 10
th time release survey, the average time between arrival of goods 
and the granting of permission was 47.0 hours for sea cargo and 23.4 hours for air cargo.  
2 As to the imports under the MRA on AEO program, Japan does not have data on it. 3 Japan does not conduct time release surveys on export. 
 IV TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
Railway Transport 
Page 104 (Para 89 and Table IV.17) 
 
4. Singapore would appreciate if Japan can conf irm that prior notification for railway 
transport is not necessary if a foreign investor is obtaining less than 10% of the stock of 
publicly-listed companies. 
 
RESPONSE: The prior notification is not necessary for such investors. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 15 
 
 
 PART II:  QUESTIONS REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT REPORT 
Investment Policy 
Page 15 Para 48 
 
5. Program for Promoting Japan  as an Asian Business Centre and Direct Investment 
into Japan  – For learning purposes, we would like to understand the success of this program 
thus far and what are the major factors or initia tives that have led to this success. We would 
also like to understand the role of the Japanes e government (central and local) in shaping 
these initiatives.  
 
RESPONSE:  The Government of Japan has implemented a variety of policies to give 
incentives to inward FDI, in collaboration w ith local municipalities’ initiatives utilizing 
regional characteristics. Those policies are summarized as the "Program for Promoting Japan as an Asian Business Center and Direct Invest into Japan". The follow-up of the Program was 
conducted in June 2012 and the progress will be  managed through PDCA (plan-do-check-act) 
cycle. The Program sets three targets to be achieved by the end of 2020: 
 1) Increase the number of high-value-added sites 2) Double the number of employees of foreign affiliates 3) Double inward FDI stock to 35 trillion yen 
 
Please refer to the website below for th e policies to achieve those targets. 
http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program.pdf 
 Page 15 Para 49 
6. Singapore also notes that para 49 of Jap an’s Government report states that the 
Japanese government “performed follow-up on th e program and the government decided to 
undertake the following initiatives, among others: 1) ‘Double Direct Investment into Japan’ 
which refers to expanding the FDI inward st ock to ¥35 trillion by the end of 2020; and 2) 
‘Open Reconstruction’ by promoting FDI in Japan”. Can Japan elaborate further on these initiatives?  RESPONSE: 
1) “Double Direct Investment into Japan”  
This goal refers to expanding the FDI inward stock to 35 trillion yen by the end of 2020 (it 
stood at 17.5 trillion yen at the end of 20 11). The Government of Japan will set 
supplementary indicators in order to gain a deta iled picture of actual investment in Japan and 
check from various angles whether the targets ar e being achieved, taking into consideration 
factors such as the global economy and Japan’s economic growth. Supplementary indicators include foreign direct investment in Japan as a percentage of GDP and the number and value 
of mergers and acquisition of Japanese companies by foreign companies.  
2) “‘Open Reconstruction’ by promoting FDI in Japan” 
In order to promote smooth and rapid reconstr uction after the Great East Japan Earthquake, it 
is important to both rebuild communities that were hit by the earthquake and revitalize the Japanese economy by strengthening Japan’s bonds with international society along with 
drawing in the vitality of foreign countries. In particular, creating stable employment on a 
large scale is an important issue for these communities. The Government of Japan will 
undertake “Open Reconstruction” by promoting FDI in these communities in order to create 
quality employment.  Page 15 Para 50 
 7. With regard to the Asian Business Location Bill (para 50 of Japan’s Government WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 16 
 
 
 report) that aims to attract global compan ies establishing new R&D facilities and Asian 
regional headquarters in Japan,  Singapore not es that global companies have to be certified 
by the competent Minister to be granted the benefits under the programme.  Could Japan provide greater detail on the certification process, as well as any criteria involved? 
 
RESPONSE: The authorization under the Act on Special Measures for Promotion of 
Research and Development Business by Specified  Multinational Enterprises is stipulated by 
Article 3, Article 4, and Article 6 of the Act.  
Article 3 provides the basic policy concerning the promotion of research and development 
business and supervisory business by specified multinational enterprises. Article 4 provides 
the requirements for certification of research and development business plans, and Article 6 provides the requirements for certification of supervisory business plans.  Please refer to “Act on Special Measures for Promotion of Research and Development 
Business, etc. by Specified Multinational Enterprises” (below) 
 http://www.meti.go.jp/english/policy/external _economy/investment/asian_center201104.pdf  
 
PART III: GENERAL QUESTIONS
8. We would like to seek clarifications on Jap an’s policies and regul ations relating to 
foreign participation in private sector health care services activities, particularly the provision 
of nursing care for the elderly.  RESPONSE:  There is no regulation which discriminates against foreign companies 
concerning entry into healthcare services a nd nursing care services for the elderly. 
 9. We note that Japan takes strong interest in harmonizing pharmaceutical 
standards/regulations, participating in th e International Conference on Harmonization 
towards this issue and also has MRA with  the EU on good manufacturing practice for 
medicinal products since 2002. What is the level of interest of Japan (and its industry) in 
negotiating MRAs on medicinal products internationally? 
 RESPONSE: Both the Japanese industry and governme nt have strong interest in 
international cooperation in the GMP area, t hus Japan is aiming to realize an early 
participation in the PIC/S framework. Although MR A is certainly one of the effective means 
of international cooperation, it requires great er burden to conclude multiple bilateral 
agreements. Therefore, at present Japan would lik e to give priority to its participation in 
PIC/S which Singapore has already joined as a member.  10. Can Japan kindly provide information on the laws and regulations in relation to the 
liberalisation of the legal services sector in Japan, and plans to further liberalise the legal 
services sector in the near future? 
 RESPONSE: The ‘Gaikoku-Ho-Jimu-Bengoshi’ system, as special measures of Article 72 of 
the Attorney Act that prohibits any person othe r than an attorney from handling legal services 
in principle, opens the way whereby a person who has the qualification to become a foreign 
lawyer and satisfies prescribed requirements, can , on the basis of the qualification to become 
a foreign lawyer and without passing any addi tional qualification test, provide legal services 
concerning prescribed foreign laws in Japan  as a “Gaikoku-Ho-Jimu-Bengoshi” (registered 
foreign lawyer (s)).  
The laws and regulations in relation to the Gaikoku-Ho-Jimu-Bengoshi system are as follows. 
・Act on Special Measures concerning the Hand ling of Legal Services by Foreign Lawyers   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 17 
 
 
 (See http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/l aw/detail/?id=1918&vm=04&re=01&new=1 ) 
・Ordinance for Enforcement of the Act on Sp ecial Measures concerning the Handling of 
Legal Services by Foreign Lawyers 
(Seehttp://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/l aw/detail/?id=2020&vm=04&re=01&new=1 ) 
 
The Ministry of Justice of Japan is consid ering a bill which will enable corporations 
composed exclusively of Gaikoku-Ho-Jimu-Bengos hi (registered foreign lawyer(s)) to be 
established and to provide legal services concerning foreign laws. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 18 
 
 
 4. AUSTRALIA 
 
QUESTIONS FROM AUSTRALIA 
 
WTO SECRETARIAT REPORT – WT/TPR/S/276 
 III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE (1) Measures Directly Affecting Imports (i) Customs clearance procedures and valuation 
 
Page 22, Paragraph 6 
Australia would be grateful if Japan would explain why its advance rulings are non-binding.  In 
particular, we would appreciate it if Japan coul d explain the consequences that flow from this 
arrangement: can the advice be ignored by the issuing authority and the applicant? 
 
RESPONSE:  Japan Customs does  issue binding rulings at the requ est of the importers or other 
interested persons, fully complying with Standard 9.9 and guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention and such rulings are honored by Japan Customs.  Even though importers have a choice of whether to use that advance ruli ng in the import declaration procedure, if they 
use it, Customs officials have to follow it and cannot ignore it. 
 
【Standards9.9 of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
The customs shall issue binding rulings at the reque st of the interested person, provided that the 
Customs have all the information they deem necessary. 
【Guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
In some administrations, they may be legally bi nding and provided for in national legislation, 
whereas in others there may simply be a co mmitment by the Customs to honor the ruling. 
 
※Japan would like to correct the last sentence in  Paragraph 6, page 22 of the Report as follows: 
At the request of importers and other concerne d parties, Japan issues written advance rulings. 
Such rulings are honored by Customs at the time of import declarations, and published on the 
Customs website for the reference for the public.  
(ii) Tariffs 
(a) Bound tariffs  
 
Page 23, Paragraph 9 
Australia welcomes Japan’s commitment toward s a successful multilateral conclusion to the 
Doha Round, including its openness to exploring different negotiating approaches, as agreed at 
the WTO Ministerial Conference in December 2011.  
We note Japan’s high bound rate on agriculture (a verage 17.8 per cent versus 3.7 per cent for 
non-agricultural products) and the small gap between  bound and applied rates.  We also note 
that the consumer nominal assistance coefficient was 1.71 in 2010 (i.e. consumers paid about 
1.71 times as much as they would have paid without  support).  Is Japan looking at reducing its 
applied agricultural tariffs, in particular as a way of addressing cost of living pressures? 
 
RESPONSE: In Japan, tariff rates are applied to resp ective products appropriately taking into 
consideration the status of domestic sectors.   
 
 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 19 
 
 
 (b) Applied MFN tariff  
Page 25, Paragraph 11 
The report notes that the quota allocation met hod and process remains somewhat intricate.  
Does Japan have any plans to streamline th e quota allocation process to make it more 
transparent and predictable and less costly to access? 
 
RESPONSE: Japan operates TRQs appropriately in c onsistent with the WTO Agreements and 
conducts it in a fair and transparent manner. Thus, there is no concrete plan to change the current procedure.  (v) State Trading  
Page 32, Paragraph 27 
According to the Secretariat’s report "the unde rlying reason for state-trading activities is to 
stabilize the supply and price of these comm odities and protect consumer interests". 
 
In November 2011, Japan stated that it was “cons idering a reform of its state-trading activities 
based on [the] ‘Supplemental Policy for Regulatory and Structural Reform’ decided by the cabinet on 22 July 2011” (G/STR/Q1/JPN/18/ 21 November 2011, at p.1).  Could Japan elaborate on the current state of these reform s?  How does the Japanese government intend to 
implement these or similar revisions to its state trading arrangements under the new Abe 
administration?  
 
RESPONSE: Concerning dairy products, Japan reform ed its state-trading activities based on 
“Supplemental Policy for Regulatory and Structural Reform” decided by the cabinet on 22 July 2011. By this reform, SBS tenders for butter and SMP are applied to the state trading activities 
by ALIC in certain cases where their supply-demand situation is expected to be seriously tight, 
thus creating an urgent need for their imports.   Concerning all products subject to state trading including products other than dairy products, 
Japan is not considering any further changes of the existing state-trading system at the moment. 
Japan will operate it in line with WTO agreem ents and may modify its administration, as 
appropriate, taking into account the op inions of domestic stakeholders. 
 
(viii) Standards, Technical Regulations a nd Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
Page 38, Paragraph 47 
We welcome Japan’s progress in implementing international standards (from 48 per cent in 
2009 to 54 per cent in 2011). Can we expect broa der implementation of in ternational standards 
before the next Trade Policy Review takes place?  RESPONSE: Japan will endeavor to increase the number  of JIS harmonized with international 
standards.   (3) Measures Affecting Production and Trade (iv) Intellectual property rights  Page 53, Paragraph 116 
Has the establishment of the Intellectual Prope rty High Court increased the amount of IP 
litigation in Japan?  Has it reduced th e cost of litigation for users?  
 RESPONSE:  It is uncertain whether the establishmen t of the Intellectual Property High Court 
has increased the amount of IP litigation in Japan . The reason is that the government of Japan 
has no data regarding the relationship between th e amount of IP litigation and the establishment 
of the Intellectual Property High Court.  
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 20 
 
 
 It is also uncertain whether its establishment has reduced the cost. The reason is that the 
government of Japan has no statistics in respect  to the cost of IP litigation, including the 
lawyer’s fees.  
What have the changes been in relation to the restructuring of the education system for IP 
Professionals in Japan?   
RESPONSE: 
・As for academic IP education, Japan has promoted intellectual property education in 
universities and graduate schools, includi ng establishing professional graduate schools 
specializing in intellectual property in 2005. 
・As for intellectual property professional tr aining, in 2006, Japan developed “The 
comprehensive strategy for the development of human capital related to intellectual property” 
focusing on increasing the number of “human capital specializing in intellectual property” 
that are directly engaged in the acquisition,  maintenance, and management of domestic 
intellectual property rights and improving their quality.  
In addition, in 2012, Japan developed “ The plan to develop intellectual property human 
capital” focusing on developing and retaining “ human capital that utilize intellectual property 
including international standardization” that can contribute to strengthening business strategy 
in the international competition of the busin ess world and intellectual property human capital 
that can play an important role globally.  
Australia seeks further information on the na ture and scope of amendments to the Japanese 
Copyright Act done in 2012 as they relate to:  (1) limitations and exceptions, and  
(2) technological protection measures. 
 
RESPONSE: 
(1) Japan amended its Copyright Act as follows;. 
(a) Creation of provisions regarding incidental appearance of something in a photo, etc 
Provisions that prescribe that the following activ ities of using copyrighted works do not infringe 
on copyrights, etc., are created. - Use of incidental copyrighted works  - Use of copyrighted works that is deemed  necessary during the stage of carrying out 
examinations to obtain permission, etc.  
- Use of copyrighted works for trials for tec hnology development or practical application  
- Use of copyrighted works for information pr ocessing necessary for preparation for information 
provision through the use of information and communication technologies  
 (b) Creation of provisions regarding automatic pub lic transmission of library materials by the 
National Diet Library 
 
The National Diet Library may carry out automatic  public transmission of out-of-print materials 
and other library materials to libraries, etc. At th e same time, libraries, etc., may, at the request 
of users, partially reproduce out-of-print materi als and other library materials received from the 
National Diet Library through automatic public transmission. 
 
(c) Creation of provisions regarding the use of  copyrighted works based  on the Public Records 
and Archives Management Act, etc. For purposes such as to provide co pyrighted works, etc., to the public in accordance with the 
provisions of the Public Records and Archives Management Act, etc., the President of the 
National Archives of Japan, etc., may, to the exte nt necessary, use the co pyrighted works, etc. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 21 
 
 
 (2) In addition to protection technologies that are covered by technological protection measures 
for copyrights, etc. under the existing law (technologies based on signal-addition methods that are used for VHS and other formats), cryptographic technologies (technologies that are used for DVD and other formats) are also covered by tec hnological protection measures, and provisions 
to regulate the evasion of technological protection measures based on cryptographic 
technologies are created. 
 
(v) Competition policy (a) Recent developments  
 
Page 69, Paragraph 181 
Will the bill amending the anti-monopoly policy (submitted in March 2010) be passed by the 
Diet with the election of the new Abe Government?  RESPONSE: The bill was scrapped due to the dissolu tion of the House of Representatives in 
November 2012. The government is now c onsidering the future of the bill. 
 
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
(1) Agriculture (ii) Border measures 
 
Page 74, Paragraph 8 
The Secretariat Report notes that AVEs were not available for 102 lines at the HS nine-digit 
level, including for milk and dairy products, live swine and meat of swine, rice and cereals.  In 
the interest of transparency, does Japan intend to publish the missing data on AVEs?  If not, 
what can Japan do to address this lack of transparency? 
 RESPONSE:  Ad valorem equivalents (AVEs) of non-ad valorem duties are automatically 
calculated with import value and volume. AVEs of specific duty can be calculated by the 
following formula; “specific duty on an item / (import value / import quantity) ×100(%). 
 
Therefore, AVEs of some tariff lines cannot be provided when there are no import or 
de minimis imports of the lines in the year.  
Page 74, Paragraph 9 
The report notes that the average fill rates for agriculture tariff rate quotas was about 63.5%.  
What are the reasons for the significant underfill an d is it related to the “somewhat intricate” 
quota allocation method and process? Has Japan a ny plans to address and rectify the underfill 
rates? 
 
RESPONSE:  The underfill of TRQs for some products is mainly related to decline of their 
domestic consumption. Concerning unused quotas, a scheme of reallocation has been already 
implemented. 
 
(5) Services 
(ii) Financial services  
Page 88, Paragraph 49-50 Australia notes Japan’s explanation that the revi sed Postal Services Privatization Act (Act No. 
30 of 2012) has a provision to ensure equivale nt conditions of competition between the Japan 
Post Group and operators offering similar services.   Given that stakeholders have expressed 
fears of ‘an uneven playing field’ we would appreciate Japan providing further information on 
how it envisions the Act will en sure equivalent conditions.  
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 22 
 
 
 RESPONSE: Measures to ensure equivalent conditions  of competition between the financial 
subsidiaries of Japan Post and other financial institu tions have been taken: It is stipulated in the 
Postal Services Privatization Act that equivale nt conditions of competition with enterprises 
engaged in like business operations should be ensured; Regulations a nd supervision under the 
Banking Act and the Insurance Business Act are app lied to Japan Post’s financial subsidiaries as 
is the case with other financial institutions, and, in addition, these subsidiaries are required to 
gain approval from the FSA and the MIC fo r new products according to the PSPA.  
 The authorities examine, in acco rdance with the PSPA, whether the equivalent conditions of 
competition are secured between these subsidiaries and other financial ins titutions before giving 
approval for new products.   Furthermore, after launching the new products, FSA and MIC may take the necessary steps in accordance with the PSPA, in  the case of possible violation of the PSPA.  
 
Page 91, Paragraph 58 
According to the Secretariat’s report, "there are no recent regulatory changes with regards to 
pension funds and mutual funds, but a working gr oup has been constituted to review regulations 
for mutual funds."  Could Japan explain how the review of mutu al funds (kyosai) initiated under the former 
government, including plans to subject these mutual funds to supervision by the Financial 
Services Agency, is being pursued under the new Abe administration.  RESPONSE:  It seems that the word “mutual fund” re ferred to in the S ecretariat’s report is 
intended to mean “investment trust”. The working group mentioned in the report was 
constituted to review the regulations on investme nt trust business, not on kyosai (mutual-aid 
activities).  Kyosai cooperative societies are mutual-aid organizations established by people in the same geographical area or field of work. The members invest their own capital and use the insurance 
services that the organization provides. These services form part of a broad range of mutual-aid 
services available to the members (joint ventures, lo ans, welfare services, etc.). Because of their 
unique nature they need to be regulated separat ely, and each of them operates within the scope 
of the law and under the supervision of  the relevant government authorities. 
 In addition, mutual-aid activities being conducted by the agricultural cooperative society and the 
consumers' cooperative society, are regulated under the Agricultural Cooperatives Act and the 
Consumer Cooperatives Act which have provisions  equivalent to those applied to private 
insurers, so that soundness of the business and consumer protection are guaranteed by prudent 
supervision such as careful reviews on the met hod for calculating the mutual aid premiums and 
the liability reserve  
 
(iii) Transport 
(b) Air transport  Page 101, Table IV.14 
Australia notes Japan allows foreign third party handling for ground handling services at Narita 
Airport, Kansai Airport and Centrair Airport.   Would Japan consider making commitments in 
the WTO on ground handling services?  RESPONSE: Japan believes that ground handling services are currently excluded from 
coverage under the GATS. Therefore, Japan does not have the intention of, nor is considering 
making specific commitments in the WTO on ground handling services.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 23 
 
 
 5. HONG KONG, CHINA 
 
WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM HONG KONG, CHINA 
 
I. Questions Regarding the Secretariat Report 
Pages 87 – 88 (Para. 47); Page 88 (Para. 48) 
 
Financial Services  
It is noted that, under the revised Postal Serv ice Privatisation Act, the Japanese Government 
will dispose the shares in Japan Po st Holdings as soon as possible. 
 Question: 
 1. Will the Japanese Government dispose the shares in Japan Post Holdings by 
selling them to a private consortium or through public offering?  Is there any restriction on foreign investment in the Japan Post Holdings?  
 RESPONSE:  The specific methods of disposal have not been decided on yet. 
The Government of Japan has the responsibility of constantly holding over 1/3 of the shares 
of the Japan Post Holdings. At  the same time, it will dispose its shares in the Japan Post 
Holdings, other than the ones to be held by the Government, at the earliest possible time. 
There is no restriction on foreign investment in the Japan Post Holdings.  
 
cf. Article 7 of the Postal Services Privatizati on Act (Act No.97 of 2005), Article 2 of the Act 
on Japan Post Holdings Co. Ltd., (Act No.98 of 2005) and Article 3 of the Supplementary Provisions of the Act.  
Pages 95 – 97 (Para. 68 and Table IV.11); Pages 97 – 98 (Para. 73) 
 
Telecommunications 
 
By its law, the Japanese Government is requi red to hold 33.3% in Nippon Telegraph and 
Telephone Corporation (NTT). 
 
Question: 
 
2. Is there any plan for the Japanese Government to further liberalise the 
telecommunication services by reducing its share holding in NTT or eliminating 
the restriction of foreign participation in NTT? 
 
RESPONSE:  Given NTT’s important public role such as responsibility of providing 
universal services, promoting research and disseminating research results, the government becomes the stable shareholder in order to prevent any domination of NTT management or 
abuse of shareholder rights by specific entities and ensure the stability of company 
management and appropriate business opera tions. For these reasons, the government is 
obliged to hold the shares of NTT.  NTT is a shareholder of NTT East and NTT West which provide most of the communications infrastructures that serve as a foundation of social activity. Foreign investment restrictions 
applied to NTT, which is deeply related to  national security, have the purpose of avoiding 
possible national security issues and influences caused by control by foreign countries. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 24 
 
 
 Therefore, there are no plans to  either rela x or abolish the above measures at this point. 
 Page 98 (Para. 77) 
 Maritime Transport 
 
The economic needs test for harbour transportation (maritime cargo handling services, container station and depot services, including inland container depot services) has been abolished in 2006 and replaced by a licensi ng system based on technical and financial 
abilities.  
 
Question: 
 3. Please share with us on the details of licensing requirements.  Did the Japanese 
authorities refer to any international pr actices or standards in formulating the 
requirements?  How long does an applic ation for a licence usually take?  How 
many foreign companies have been gran ted licences since the implementation of 
the system?  
 
RESPONSE:  In 2006, the licensing requirement system to enter/leave the Port 
Transportation Business was shifted to a permission requirement system.  The requirements 
of economic needs tests were eliminated regard ing Port Transportation Business according to 
the revision of the Port Transportation Business Act (Please see the notification S/C/N/571).  Permission requirements are 1) ha ving adequate facilities and work force, an appropriate plan, 
a management organization that clearly defin es the scope of responsibilities for the persons 
involved in the operation of the business in qu estion, a sound financial foundation, and 2) not 
meeting disqualification clauses. The Japanese au thorities formulated the requirements so that 
they could conform to WTO rules. The standard period of time typically required between an application’s arrival and the rendering of a di sposition regarding that application is two 
months. No foreign company has been grante d a licence since the implementation of the 
system.  
 
Page 101 (Para. 82) 
 
Air Transport 
 
A recently published document defining the medium-long term strategy for aviation has 
mentioned the possibility of establishing a c oncession regime and even privatization of 
airports.  In addition, in order to give prefer ence to small and medium-size aircraft, promote 
the development of low-cost carriers and advan ce the open sky policy, a restructuration of the 
landing fees schedule has also been envisaged.  
 
Question: 
 
4. We are interested to know whether there is any implementation plan for the 
medium-long term strategy for aviation, including the establishment of a 
concession regime, privatization of airports, and the restructuration of the landing 
fees.  
 
RESPONSE:  The New-Kansai International Airport Co. Ltd (NKIAC) was newly 
established in April 2012 based on a law passed in the Diet, operating Kansai Int. Airport 
(KIX) and Itami Airport (ITM), which are locat ed in Kansai district, the second largest 
economic area in Japan. This motion aims at increasing the enterprise value of both airports   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 25 
 
 
 and at early concession contract realization as soon as possible (by 2014 at the earliest) for 
the purpose of reforming/strengthening KIX as our nation's international hub airport and increasing demands for aviation in Kansai through the appropriate and effective utilization of 
KIX & ITM. 
As for the 28 national airports, in order to ma ke them serve as a focal point for regional 
vitalization by bringing more tourists and vi sitors, we are considering unifying aeronautical 
and non-aeronautical activities according to local needs and context, and to make use of the 
management abilities of private sectors to impr ove the efficiency of airport governance. 
 II. Questions Regarding the Government Report 
 
Nil from Hong Kong, China.  
III. Other Questions 
 
Nil from Hong Kong, China. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 26 
 
 
 6. UNITED STATES 
 
WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM THE UNITED STATES 
 
I. ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 
(iii) Foreign direct investment 
 
Page 8, paragraph 18: The Secretariat indicates th at Japan’s stock of inward FDI has remained 
static since 2009, as a share of GDP, yet its stock of outward FDI has risen substantially.  
Further, on Page 19, paragraph 32, similar da ta is presented in the Secretariat’s report along 
with concerns expressed by Japan’s trading part ners with respect to barriers to mergers and 
acquisitions in Japan.  What legal and regulator y measures will Japan consider to ensure there 
are equivalent opportunities for inward FD I through merger and acquisition of Japanese 
companies compared to the opportunities that  Japanese companies have to expand through 
outward FDI through mergers and acquisitions in  other countries?  Is Japan considering the 
introduction of requirements, for example, for the inclusion of independent directors on the 
board of directors of listed companies?   RESPONSE:  As to inward FDI through M&A of Japanese companies, it is difficult to answer 
the question as the Secretariat’s report does not specify “impedimen ts to mergers and 
acquisitions” clearly. However, the Government of  Japan is currently implementing policies to 
promote FDI into Japan.  As to the inclusion of independent directors on the board of directors of listed companies, the 
Government of Japan has been considering intr oducing requirement of information disclosure 
applied for large companies in order to encourag e companies to appoint independent directors. 
 
II. TRADE POLICY REGIME: FRAMEWORK AND OBJECTIVES 
(i) Trade policy formulation and implementation 
 
Page 10, paragraph 2:  Does the Abe Gove rnment intend to continue the previous 
Government’s policy of, as mentioned in the S ecretariat’s report, taking “…major steps to 
promote high-level major economic partnerships with major trading partners?”  If so, what 
definition does the Abe Government use to define  a high-level economic partnership, including 
with respect to the minimal percentage of tariff lines that would be liberalized to achieve this 
goal? 
 
RESPONSE:  Promotion of trade liberalization is the pillar of Japan’s trade policy. Japan deems 
it necessary to strengthen the free trading system a nd incorporate the vibrant growth of trading 
partners in order to attain st rong economic growth of our own. To this end, Japan will actively 
engage in EPA/FTA negotiations with selected  countries of strategic importance to Japan. 
 
Page 12, paragraph 6:   Will the Abe Government continue to implement the Government 
Revitalization Unit recommendations, as menti oned in the Secretariat report?  What 
mechanism will the Abe Government use to pur sue regulatory reform?  What areas are of 
priority?  
RESPONSE:  Following the termination of the Committee on Regulatory and Institutional 
Reform established under the Government Revitali zation Unit, the Council for the Promotion of 
Regulatory Reform (CPRR) was re-established in  January 2013 as an advisory body to the 
Prime Minister for the purpose of accelerating regulatory reforms. The CPRR will investigate and deliberate on reform issues particularly related to the fields of environment, energy, health 
care and labor. The CPRR will also conduct follow-up  surveys on cabinet decisions made in the 
past.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 27 
 
 
 (ii) Transparency and policy evaluation 
 
Page 13, paragraph 8: The Secret ariat report highlights that not all bills are subject to ex-ante 
regulatory impact analyses (RIAs), citing the draft bill on the reform of the Japan Post Office as 
one example.  Please explain what factors influence whether an RIA will be conducted?   
 RESPONSE: The policies prescribed by No. 6, Article 3 of Cabinet Order for Enforcement of 
the Government Policy Evaluation Act are required to be subject to ex-ante regulatory impact 
analyses (RIAs). 
 
Administrative organs subject to the Governme nt Policy Evaluation Act (GPEA) are prescribed 
by Article 2 of the GPEA. Almost all administrative organs are subject to the GPEA, but the Cabinet Secretariat which is responsible for draw ing up the draft bill on the reform of the Japan 
Post Office is an exception. Therefore, the Cabi net Secretariat doesn’t have an obligation to 
conduct ex-ante RIAs. 
 
URL：Government Policy Evaluation Act ， 
Cabinet Order for Enforcement of the Government Policy Evaluation Act 
http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/hyouka/seisaku_n/pes.html 
 (ii) Regional trade agreements  
 
Page 15, paragraph 16: The Secretariat’s report di rectly states that “Japan's tariff liberalization 
has in general been less than that of its trading partners by the end of the implementation of the 
agreement, with agricultural products tending to  be excluded from liberalization or subject to 
restricted liberalization through tariff rate quotas.”  It also notes that Japan will only liberalize 
59.6 percent of its agricultural tariff lines as part  of its new agreement with India and only 61.6 
percent of its agricultural tariff lines as part of  its new agreement with Peru.  How does Japan 
view its low percentage of agricultural tariff lin e liberalization, including in light of Article 
XXIV’s “substantially all trade” requirement?  
RESPONSE: From the view point of consistency with  GATT Article XXIV’s “substantially all 
trade” requirement, Japan thinks that each side  should eliminate tariffs within 10 years 
representing more than 90% of the total value of  trade. Under the EPAs with India and Peru, 
each side will eliminate tariffs within 10 years re presenting more than 90% of the total value of 
trade.  
 
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
(1) MEASURES  DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS (i) Customs clearance procedures and valuation 
 Page 22, paragraph 6: The Secretariat report notes that upon request, written advance rulings are 
published on the customs website, and that these rulings are not binding. 
- What subject matters does the customs service provide advance rulings on? 
- As Japan does not provide binding advance rulings, please explain how advance rulings 
are used by importers? 
- Please explain how Japan’s customs servi ce uses these advance rulings, or more 
specifically the status of the advan ce rulings with the customs service? 
- Can an importer rely on the advance ruling issu ed at any port of entry in Japan, or are 
advance rulings port specific? 
- Approximately how many advance ruling requests a year does Japan receive? 
- Approximately how many advance rulings does Japan issue in a year? 
- Under what circumstances will Japan  not issue an advance ruling? 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 28 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  Japan Customs does issue binding rulings at  the request of the importers or other 
interested persons, fully complying with Standard 9.9 and guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention and such rulings are honored by Japan Customs.  
By utilizing advance ruling system, importers can calculate customs duty and so on more 
accurately in advance of import declarations. And they also expedite the handover of the goods 
by attaching the response paper at the time of import declaration.  
【Standards9.9 of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
The customs shall issue binding rulings at the reque st of the interested person, provided that the 
Customs have all the information they deem necessary. 
【Guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
In some administrations, they may be legally bi nding and provided for in national legislation, 
whereas in other there may simply be a co mmitment by the Customs to honor the ruling. 
 
※Japan would like to correct the last sentence in Paragraph 6 as follows. 
At the request of importers and other concerne d parties, Japan issues written advance rulings. 
Such rulings are honored by Customs at the time of import declarations, and published on the Customs website for the reference of the public. 
 
Page 23, paragraph 8: The Secretariat’s report states that Japan customs service had only 31 
complaints about customs matters in 2011.  A ccording to chart I.2 on page 9 in section II, 
Japan imported approximately 854.6 billion in goods.  In light of the small number of 
complaints for such a large volume of imports, we would appreciate the following information:  
‐ What are the requirements to file an appeal  against a customs service decision in Japan? 
‐ Can any party involved in the transaction file an appeal against a customs service 
decision (i.e. importer, exporter, interested person)? 
‐ Can any decision about that transaction be appealed? 
‐ Does the fact that there is an appeal, or the st atus of such an appeal, affect the release of 
goods? 
‐ Who makes up the appeal body that hears and decides appeals?  Is the body made up of 
customs officials, either current or former?  
 RESPONSE:  1. Time-limit set forth in the provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 89 and Article 
90 of the Customs Law must be met to file an appeal.  
 
The time-limit for an appeal to the Director-General of Customs (hereinafter referred to as "the 
DG") shall be not longer than two months from the day immediately following the day when a disposition made by the DG is known.   Where a party who filed an appeal is not satisfi ed with a decision by th e DG on the appeal, the 
party may file an appeal to the Minister of Fi nance. The time-limit for the appeal shall be not 
longer than one month from the day immediately following the day when a decision by the DG made on an appeal is known.  2. Any party whose rights or interests protected under the Customs Law or any other laws 
pertaining to customs duty have been infringed or may inevitably be infringed may file an 
appeal to the DG.  3. A party may file an appeal to the DG if the party is not satisfied with a disposition taken by 
the DG under the provisions of the Customs Law or any other laws pertaining to customs duty 
(paragraph 1 of Article 89 of the Customs Law). In cases where a party filed an appeal against   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 29 
 
 
 the above-mentioned disposition to the DG, the part y may file an appeal against the decision to 
the Minister of Finance (Article 90 of the Customs Law).  A party may also file an appeal against inactio n of the Customs to the DG or the Minister of 
Finance.  
 4. The fact that there is an appeal, or the status  of such an appeal, does not affect the release of 
the goods. However, where a party files an appeal to the DG or the Minister of Finance against a 
disposition on goods for which export or import are prohibited, the party is not allowed to 
receive the goods until the disposition is revoked. 
 5. The Dissatisfaction Review Committee on Customs is composed of no more than 20 academic experts, assigned by the Minister of Finance.  When an appeal is made to the DG, or to the Mi nister of Finance against a disposition other than 
the above-mentioned dispositions, current Custom s officers deliberate an appeal and the DG 
makes a decision. 
 
(ii) Tariffs 
 
Page 25, Paragraph 11:  The Secretariat’s repor t states that only 18% of Japan’s out-of-quota 
rates are ad valorem, compared to 100% of its in -quota rates.  Furthermore, the average rates 
differ considerably: in-quota rates average 18.1% , while out-of-quota rates average 91.5%.   
 The Secretariat also characterized Japan’s quot a allocation method and process as “intricate.”   
‐ Please explain why Japan’s out-of-quota rates are more complex, as well as any plans 
Japan has to simplify these tariffs. 
‐ Please explain why Japan’s out-of-quota rates are so much higher and any plans Japan 
has to unilaterally reduce these tariffs. 
 RESPONSE:  Out of quota rates of Japan's TQ items have been set in accordance with the UR. 
 
(vii) Government procurement 
 
Page 34, Paragraph 36 :  The Secretariat report notes that:  “Japan considers that its government 
procurement is conducted without  restriction on suppliers' nationality or on the origin of 
products or services.”  Please explain what percentage of public works projects are won by 
foreign firms?  What accounts for Japan’s low percentage of foreign involvement?  
 
RESPONSE:  There is no comprehensive data on what percentage of public works projects are 
won by foreign firms in Japan.  Therefore, it is impossible to evaluate if its foreign 
involvement is low or not. 
 
Page 35, paragraph 39: According to the Secretar iat report, Japan has set a goal of securing half 
of Japan’s domestic demand for wood from the use of domestic wood. 
 
‐ Is Japan still considering the introduction th is coming spring of an “eco-point” subsidy  
program for consumer purchases of “local wood (chiiki-zai)?”  If so, please describe 
the program to be implemented, and the timing for implementation. 
‐ In fully specific terms, how can foreign supp liers of foreign wood become eligible for 
this program, if implemented?  In additi on, describe the procedure whereby foreign 
suppliers could receive the “local wood (chiik i-zai)” designation that appears to be the 
key criteria necessary to join the program ?  Also, would the foreign supplier be 
required to have a local presence in Japan, or within specific prefectures, to qualify?   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 30 
 
 
 ‐ What legal requirements are in place to determine whether wood qualifies as “local 
wood (chiiki-zai)?” 
‐ Which governments or organizations are ab le to determine whether wood qualifies as 
“local wood (chiiki-zai)?” 
 RESPONSE:  Japan is now considering introducing this coming spring a program that will 
provide “wood-use-points” to those who build wo oden houses, decorate interiors with wood, 
and buy wood products. These points earned by th e program could be exchanged for such items 
as agricultural, forest and fishery products.  Japan is currently consid ering the specific conditions 
of this program.   
 
(viii) Standards, technical regulations, a nd sanitary and phytosanitary measures 
 Page 37, Paragraphs 44:  Given that Japan ’s domestic standards are often created by 
committees that may be limited to Japanese expe rts and domestic industry representatives, how 
does Japan ensure transparency in the standards development pr ocess and ensure that there are 
opportunities for interested parties to participate in the process?  
 RESPONSE: In Japan, in accordance w ith the ANNEX 3 of the TBT Agreement, before 
adopting standards, periods for the submission of  comments on the draft standards by interested 
parties are provided and notices announcing th e periods for commenting are published. 
 In addition, in the Action Programme for Improve d Market Access (Standards and Certification, 
and Import Procedure of 30 September 1985, re vised on 30 June 2008), it is prescribed 
concerning the standards development process that the ministries or agencies in charge of the 
systems carefully consider the degree of im pact on the access to the Japanese market and 
provide in the process of drafting standards  the opportunities of hearing from foreign interested parties, such as public consultati on based on the Administrative Procedure Act and 
the participation of foreign stakeholders in  the Committees. Japan is working to ensure 
transparency according to this Action Programme. 
 
Page 38, Paragraphs 46-48: Regarding the secti on on voluntary standards, there are instances 
where Japan notes that the standards or perfo rmance rating systems are not mandatory, but 
voluntary, indicating that  products do not have to receive  Japan’s standard or performance 
ratings in order to enter the market. However,  there may be incentives to buy a product with a 
Japanese rating, such as satisfying requirements or incentives for energy efficiency. In such 
instances, foreign products lacking a Japanese standa rd or rating would be at a disadvantage in 
Japan’s market. How does Japan ensure that volunt ary standards do not create such obstacles to 
equal opportunities in Japan’s market?   RESPONSE: Under the JIS and JAS schemes, foreign products in conformity with these 
schemes can be graded and enjoy equal treatment in Japan’s market and thus create no 
unnecessary obstacles to equal opportunities. In  addition, in accordance with the TBT 
Agreement, notices and intentions to revise th ese standards are published and any interested 
party can submit comments on the draft standard to ensure transparency in the standards 
development process. 
 
Page 39, Paragraph 51:  The Secretariat report notes that  “About 8,000 domestic and 700 
foreign factories in 21 countries and economies are certified to affix JIS marks (JIS Mark 
scheme).”  There are other standards regimes in place in Japan (e.g. JET standards).  What is 
the situation or market for certification laboratories for these other standards?  Is it easy for 
other certification laboratories to enter Japan’s ma rket for JET or other marks, even including 
JIS?     WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 31 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  Since the conformity assessment system which the Secretariat mentioned is not 
based on the Japanese law, the Japanese government is not in a position to comment on the 
situation or the market regarding a private (non-government) certification scheme (ex. JET 
certification scheme). 
 
Regarding to the JIS Mark scheme based on th e JIS law, the Japanese Government accredits 
product certification bodies if the certification bodies satisfy the requirements of ISO/IEC 17065 and those of JIS law.  
Page 42, paragraph 61: The Secretariat’s report states that “ over 30 of the revisions (notified 
to the WTO) include changes to maximum residue limits (MRLs) for pesticides and 
amendments on food additives.”  Japan’s du al system for classifying pesticides system 
presents significant deterrents from registering post-harvest fungicides.  If a pesticide is applied to a crop before harvest it is classified as a pesticide. If the same pesticide is applied to a 
crop after harvest it is considered a food additive.   If an applicant wishes to register a pesticide 
for post and pre harvest use, it is our un derstanding that Japan requires two separate 
applications.  This system for restricting a pes ticide is lengthy and expensive.  How does Japan 
explain its need for having a dual classification system under this scenario?  How does this dual 
classification system prevent duplication of resources and inefficiencies for registering pesticides?  
 
RESPONSE:  Under the Japanese legal system, a fungicide that is applied to crops after harvest 
exclusively for preserving them is categorized  as a food additive under the Food Sanitation Act. 
This legal classification will not change even in the future.   
If a fungicide for which maximum residue limits (MRLs) have already b een set as a pesticide 
based on the Food Sanitation Act is applied af ter harvest, it requires designation (pre-market 
approval) as a food additive. In the designation of a food additive, the applicant is requested to 
submit some documents but Japan believes that th ey do not exceed the scope of those required 
for pesticide registration in the United States. Therefore, Japan does not consider that the 
existing Japanese system results in an excessive burden regarding in terms of time and costs. 
 
The designation of food additives and the revisi on of existing MRLs for pesticides both require 
risk assessment by the Food Safety Commission of Japan (FSC) and review by the Ministry of 
Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) based on the risk assessment by the FSC. Since May 
2010, the Expert Committee on Pesticide Residue  in the FSC has invited the appropriate 
members of the Expert Committee on Food Additiv es to join the Expert Committee on Pesticide 
Residues meetings. Reviews by the MHLW are carried out at two separate committees (on food additives and on pesticide residues). The MHLW co nducts them in a time-efficient manner, for 
example, by holding committee meetings during th e same period of time. Therefore, Japan does 
not consider that the Japanese system, which the United States calls the dual classification 
system, results in a lengthy procedure. In add ition the MHLW is making the utmost efforts to 
speed up the procedure, for example, by making a SPS notification to the World Trade 
Organization and inviting domestic public comment s in parallel with the committee meetings.  
 If a pesticide is used in Japan  for the purpose of plant protection in agriculture, it requires 
premarket registration based on the Agricultu ral Chemicals Regulation Law. In pesticide 
registration, regardless of whether a pesticide is  used pre-harvest or post-harvest, it will be 
registered on condition that the pesticide does not cause any problem concerning the following 
three aspects under proposed good agricultural practi ce (GAP): 1) pesticide residues in crops, 2) 
occupational safety, and 3) adver se environmental effects. This process is similar to that of the 
pesticide registration in the United States.  
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 32 
 
 
 Page 44, paragraph 70:  The Secretariat’s repor t states that country of origin labeling of 
ingredients is “mandatory for domestically prod uced processed food.”  Is country of origin 
labeling of ingredients required for all domestically produced processed food?  If not, please 
clarify which processed products require such labeling. 
 
RESPONSE: In Japan, according to the JAS Law, domes tically processed food products must 
label the place of origin for the main ingredients co ntained in the product. This rule is applied to 
the food groups and 4 items listed below:   
22 Food Groups 
1. Dried mushrooms, vegetables and fruit 
2. Salted mushrooms, vegetables and fruit  
3. Boiled or steamed mushrooms, vegetables, pulses and bean paste  
4. Mixed cut vegetables, fruit and ve getables, mixed fruit and mushrooms  
5. Green tea and green tea beverages 
6. Pounded rice  
7. Roasted unshelled peanuts, roasted p eanuts, fried peanuts and roasted pulses 
8.Brown sugar and processed brown sugar products  
9. Konjac  
10. Seasoned meat 
11. Boiled or steamed meat and edible chicken eggs  
12. Seared meat  
13. Battered meat for deep-frying  
14. Ground beef, pork and other mixed meats  
15. Dried or salted seafood, seaweed, dried seaweed, and other types of dried seaweed 
16. Salted seafood and seaweed  
17. Seasoned seafood and seaweed 
18. Rolled seaweed cooked in sauce 
19. Boiled or steamed seafood and seaweed 
20. Seared seafood 
21. Battered seafood for deep-frying  
22. Mixture of perishable foods other than those in 4 or 14  
 
4 Items 
Pickled farm products 
Frozen vegetables 
Grilled eel 
Dried bonito flakes  
 
(2) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING EXPORTS 
(iii) Border adjustment in respect of internal taxes and import duties Refund of import duties 
 Page 47, paragraphs 85 and 86: Does Japan provide advance rulings or any written guidance for 
duty refund programs described here, or  any other duty deferral programs? 
 RESPONSE: Customs Counselors provide advice on the overall issue of import/export 
procedures including the tax refund and extension of the time limit of payment of duty. 
 Information on the procedure for applying for the service is available on the Japan Customs 
Website below. 
- The tax refund system, in which importers may receive tax refund for those import goods, if 
they are exported without any change in their nature and form from the time of import:    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 33 
 
 
 http://www.customs.go.jp/english/c-answer_e/imtsukan/1602_e.htm  
- The duty deferral programs:  
http://www.customs.go.jp/english/c-answer_e/imtsukan/1302_e.htm  
 
(3) MEASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE 
(vi) Intellectual property rights 
 Page 62, Paragraph 151: The Secretariat’s report notes that GIs are protected in Japan under the 
Trademarks Act and the Unfair Competition Prevention Act. 
‐ Could Japan explain in further detail how GIs are protected under those acts, including 
with respect to foreign GIs? 
 
RESPONSE:  (Trademark Act) 
In accordance with Article 22 of the TRIPS Agre ement, trademarks that contain GIs including 
foreign GIs or that consist of GIs, which ma y cause misunderstanding of origin (quality of 
goods) are rejected or invalidated based on Article 4 (1) (xvi) of the Trademark Act. 
 With regard to “Additional Protection for GIs fo r Wines and Spirits” (Article 23 of the TRIPS 
Agreement), for trademarks that indicate the origin  of wines or spirits produced in Japan or a the 
WTO Member, the trademarks prohibited in the Me mber to be used for wines or spirits not 
originating in a region of the Member and used for wines or spirits not originating in a region in 
the Member, are rejected or invalidated based on Article 4 (1) (xvii) of the Trademark Act. 
 (Unfair Competition Prevention Act) Article 2 (1) (xiii) of the Unfair Compe tition Prevention Act prohibits the acts of 
misrepresenting information on goods in a manner that is likely to mislead the public with 
regard to the place of origin including foreign GIs as unfair competition. 
 
‐ We understand that a study group under the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and 
Fisheries (MAFF) has been examining options including developing a sui generis  GI 
protection system aiming for the revitalization of rural communities for agriculture, forestry and fisheries through the “utiliza tion of regional brand products.”  Please 
explain how implementing a sui generis system for protecting GIs would contribute to 
the establishment of regional brand products. What is the status of the study group’s 
recommendations, which were originally scheduled  to be published in August 2012?  Is 
Japan contemplating any other changes re lated to protection for GIs in Japan?   
 RESPONSE:  Japan recognizes that various types of GI protection schemes have been 
introduced in WTO Members. Whatever the schem e is, Japan understands that a GI protection 
system in which a public entity authorizes linka ge between the region and quality/characteristics 
of products, as well as a commitment to the protec tion of regional brands, would contribute to 
the utilization of the regional brand product s, and thus contribute to rural economy. 
 The plans of future discussions by the study group and the method of GI protection in Japan are 
yet to be determined. Japan will continue to  consider the matter, taking into account the 
opinions of WTO Members.  Page 65, Paragraph 163:  Regarding the two claims brought under the “IPR Overseas 
Infringement Investigation Program,” please elaborate on this program.  What were the issues 
in contention?  What was the nationality of the par ties?  Is this remedy available to any rights 
holder or only Japanese ones?  How long has this program been in existe nce?  Does Japan plan 
to invigorate this enforcement remedy, so that more rights holders use this tool? 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 34 
 
 
 RESPONSE: One claim was concerned with the busin ess name system in Hong-Kong, and the 
other was about the trademark law in Turkey.  In addition, the Office also investigated the 
third claim about pirated DVD problems in Malaysia .  In all these three cases, the parties who 
requested the investigation were industrial organizations in Japan.  This program was 
established for use by any parties in Japan in April 2005. The Office does not intend to change 
this program at this time.  Page 65, Table III.9:  We would appreciate mo re information about infringement concerning 
patents, design rights, copyrights, and unfair co mpetition, as indicated in Table III.9 on pages 65 
and 66.  Specifically, how many of these cases proceeded to trial?  How many were settled 
before the issue could be argued be fore the court?  What was the subject matter of the patents, 
design rights, copyrights, and unfair competition?  
RESPONSE:  
1) None of the cases were pro ceeded to trial during 2009-2011. 
2) There was neither complains nor appeals during 2009-2011 on the matters of the seizure of 
the goods infringing patent rights, design  rights, copyrights, and unfair competition. 
 Page 67, Paragraphs 171 and 172 :  The Secretariat’s report refers  to efforts that Japan has 
made through multilateral and bila teral cooperation to protect inte rnational intellectual property 
rights.  Is Japan considering acceding to the Si ngapore Treaty?  Aside from participation in 
the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), would Japan please elaborate on those 
efforts, especially those done on a bilateral basis?  
 RESPONSE: Concerning Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks, Japan is preparing for 
early accession to the treaty. 
 With regard to the international cooperation and harmonization of the IPR system, Japan has 
been making various efforts particularly in the ar eas of patents and copyrights.  In the area of 
patents, Japan has been participating in patent harmonization discussions at various 
international fora. The Tegernsee Group, which is composed of patent offices of Denmark, 
France, Germany, UK, US and Japan, and the Eur opean Patent Offices, was established in 2011. 
Japan is also engaging in the discussions on patent harmonization among the IP5, which is 
composed of the European Patent Office, Japan  Patent Office (JPO), Korean Intellectual 
Property Office, State Intellectual Property Office of the People's Republic of China, and United 
States Patent and Trademark Office. 
 
In addition to the above, Japan thinks that prag matic approaches are also important for patent 
harmonization. Therefore, the JPO is promoti ng work-sharing of patent examination through 
Patent Prosecution Highway (PPH) programs on a bilateral basis.  The number of patent offices in countries and regions that the JPO h as commenced the PPH program with is 24 as of 
the end of January 2013. At the same time, th e JPO is conducting patent examiners exchange on 
a bilateral basis to deepen mutual understanding on  patent laws and practices. In 2012, the JPO 
conducted examiner exchanges with the European Patent Office, the Eurasian Patent Office and 
the patent offices of Germany, Korea, China, Russia, Taiwan, India, Spain, Sweden, Mexico, 
Brazil and Portugal.   
In the area of copyrights, Japan regularly hol ds consultations with China and Korea for 
requesting stronger countermeasures against pir acy. In March 2010, the Agency for Cultural 
Affairs (ACA) concluded a Memo randum of Understandi ng (MoU) with the National Copyright 
Administration of China and in September 2011, ACA concluded a MoU with the Ministry of 
Culture, Sports and Tourism, Republic of Kore a, to build and strengthen a framework for 
cooperation regarding Copyrights and related rights respectively. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 35 
 
 
 IV.  TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
(1) AGRICULTURE (i) Structure 
 Page 73, Paragraph 2:  The Secretariat’s report states that new legislation, a Basic Policy and 
Action Plan to Revitalize Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries , was implemented in 
October 2011.  
‐ What are the key terms of this legislati on and how does it differ from previous or 
existing agriculture policies?  The United States would also welcome any citations for 
studies and government websites that woul d provide further information on this. 
 
RESPONSE: The Basic Policy and Action Plan states that the government will work on 
reconstruction of the disaster-affected area a nd effective countermeasures against nuclear 
disasters, while working intensiv ely over the next five years for the enhancement of the 
competitiveness and soundness of Japan’s food, agri culture, forestry, and fisheries and for the 
promotion of regional economies. It contains a number of concrete policy measures whose 
directions have been broadly specified by the Basic Plan on Food, Agriculture and Rural Areas 
that was decided by the Cabinet in March 2010.  The English version of the Basic Policy and 
Action Plan is available on the following website. http://www.npu.go.jp/policy/polic y05/pdf/20120815/ 20120815_en.pdf  
 
Page 73, Paragraph 2:  The Secretariat states that  a key goal of Japan’s agriculture policy is to 
achieve a higher self-sufficiency ratio.  With  respect to Japan’s programs to encourage 
domestic production, how does Japan view such programs in light of the WTO Agreements?  
 RESPONSE: In order to enhance the food self-sufficiency ratio, it is necessary that farmers 
produce agricultural products that are attractive to consumers. The government is promoting 
agricultural structural reforms in order to facilita te farmers’ efforts in this regard, including 
strengthening coordination between the food manufacturing sector and the agricultural sector, 
and consolidation of farmland. All of these policy measures are implemented in accordance with the WTO Agreements.  
Page 73, Paragraph 3:  The Secretariat’s report indicates that there has been a dramatic rise in the 
number of general corporations newly involved in agriculture from December 2009 and through 
March 2012, yet Japanese authorities state that ther e are no data detailing general corporations’ 
share of agricultural production.   
‐ Can Japan give an estimate of the numbers and explain the possible impacts of 
corporate ownership on Japanese agriculture?  
 
RESPONSE: The government of Japan does not have data from which the numbers the United 
States requested could be estimated. As for the possible impacts of corporate ownership of farmland, it could be an obstacle for the effici ent use of farmland in Japan. Because corporate 
ownership of farmland ca nnot be cancelled, which may lead to  inefficient use of farmland in 
case that the farmland is abandoned or le ft idle without proper management. 
 
Page 73, Paragraph 5:   According to the Secretariat’s repor t, the OECD has estimated Japan’s 
producer support (PSE – 50%) and consumer support (CSE- 42%) to  be well above the OECD 
averages of 18% and 8% respectively.  
- What is Japan’s view of whether these numbe rs are in line with Japan’s calculation of 
these levels, and does Japan consider the curre nt levels sustainable in the long-term?  
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 36 
 
 
 RESPONSE: Japan relies on imports for 60% of demand of food on a calorie basis as the 
largest net-food importing country in the world. In order to ensure the sustainable development of agriculture, a certain level of support is necessary, especially for the land-intensive type 
where the size of farm management is very small (average size of farm management: Japan: 
2ha, U.S.: 170ha, Australia: 2970ha) given the co nditions that 70% of the national land is 
mountainous area.  The PSE has been declining compared to 1980’s, and, for example, the domestic producer price 
of rice has substantially declined from \311/kg in 1986 to \185/kg in 2011.  
 
The government will continue to promote agricultu ral structural reform in accordance with the 
WTO Agreements.  Page 74, Paragraph 6:  According to the Secret ariat’s report, in 2010 Japan implemented a new 
single-year pilot direct-payment program on rice, which was subsequently implemented 
formally for rice and expanded to several other crops. 
 
- Can Japan elaborate on how the program operates, including the eligibility requirements 
of participating farmers? 
- Can Japan provide an update on the success of  this program, including the hectares 
registered under the program and by commodity? 
- The United States notes in WT/TPR/M/243/Add.1, in response to a U.S. question 
regarding notifications of this new program , Japan would notify this program to the 
WTO in due course.  When does Japan intend to notify this program? 
 RESPONSE: 
- Farmers who produce for the purpose of selling their products are eligible for the program 
(farmers who produce only for self-consumption are not eligible).   - Regarding rice, 1,022 thousand ha was covered by the program in 2011 (acreage for self-consumption is deducted.)  
Regarding other commodities such as wheat  and soybeans, unlike in the case of the 
stand-alone payment scheme for rice, the pa yments are supported by basket budgets and 
therefore the exact coverage is not availabl e. However, since self-consumption of those 
commodities is relatively rare, it is naturally assu med that the acreage covered by the program is 
not very far from the total area planted.   - Work on notification is still under way. 
 
(ii) Border measures 
 
Page 74, Paragraph 8:  The Secretariat’s report stat es that Japan’s tariffs tend to be particularly 
high and variable for vegetables, cereals, and sugars and sugar confectionary.  Please describe 
what factors may cause tariffs to be variable. 
 
RESPONSE: The tariffs on some of the items referred to in the question are scheduled as 
non-ad valorem duties. Ad valorem equivale nts (AVEs) of non-ad valorem duties are 
automatically calculated with import value and vol ume. AVEs are influenced by fluctuations in 
the exchange rates and international commodity prices. 
 
Page 75, paragraph 9 and Page 135 Table AI V.1 (Tariff quota and in-quota imports, FY 
2007-2010):  
 
‐ Japan’s average tariff quota fill rate in 2010 was 63.5 percent.  Please explain why the 
rate is not higher.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 37 
 
 
 ‐ Please explain Japan’s administrative procedure for filling agricultural tariff rate quotas 
and Japan’s plans to improve its fill rates of  tariff quotas, including for butter and butter 
oil. 
‐ With respect to butter imports eligible for u se at international trade fairs, we understand 
that, in addition to the requirements deta iled in document “International #1241, Year 24 
(2012) Tariff Rate Quota Announcement #48 re garding the Tariff Rate quota for Butter 
and Butter Oil for the Fiscal Year 2012,” MAFF imposes additional requirements on retailers before, during and after completion of promotional events.  Please describe the 
nature and purpose of these additional requirements.  
 RESPONSE:  Japan operates TRQs in a manner consiste nt with WTO Agreements and in a fair 
and transparent manner. The underfill of TRQs for so me products is mainly related to decline of 
their domestic consumption related to these TRQs. 
 
The allocation of tariff quotas for agricultural pr oducts is implemented by the Ministry of 
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) in  accordance with the Government Ordinance on 
the tariff quota system. For the details of the allocation for each product, please refer to the 
notification (MA:1) to the committee on Agri culture. Concerning unused quotas, a scheme of 
reallocation has been implemented. 
 
  “Butter and butter oil” is imported according to the requirements in the document “Tariff 
Rate Quota Announcement”, and no further requi rements are imposed. Based on this document, 
MAFF asks applicants to confirm whether importe d products will be used for the specific 
purpose appropriately. 
 
Page 76, Paragraph 10:  Japan purchases and mark ets directly a certain amount of imported 
rice under its Ordinary Minimum Access (OMA) sy stem.  Japan also provides imported rice as 
food aid.  From 2010 to 2012, did Japan provide any of its rice purchased via the OMA system 
as food aid?  
RESPONSE:  The food aid that Japan provided from 2010 to 2012 includes a part of rice 
purchased via the OMA.  
(iii) Domestic measures 
 
Pages 79, paragraph 21 and page 83, paragraph 32: The Secretariat report highlights the current 
reconstruction efforts of by the Government of Japan of its fishing industry post-tsunami.  Can 
Japan please elaborate on the reconstruction programs underway, in particular the programs 
related to vessel and infrastructure reconstruction?   Is it the intention of the Government of 
Japan to rebuild the fishing fleet capacity to pre-tsunami levels?  Is the status of the fish stocks 
in the fishing areas that will be impacted by retu rning fleet capacity to pre-tsunami levels taken 
into account in these reconstruction efforts? 
 Page 83, paragraph 29:  The Secretariat report notes that despite management and conservation 
efforts, 40% of Japan’s fisheries resources are at low levels and resource recovery plans have 
been developed.  Can the government of Japan  please elaborate as to whether any of these 
fisheries fall under the post-tsunami reconstructio n programs currently underway to rebuild the 
fishing industry?  Does Japan provide capac ity-enhancing subsidies for fishing on the 
resources that are in urgent need of recovery, or do the resource recovery plans address subsidy 
reduction in any way?  
RESPONSE:  The reconstruction programs include support to the fishery cooperative 
associations and organizations for building sm all fishing vessels for joint use, introducing 
fishing vessels based on the joint operation plan, and introducing set nets for joint use. They WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 38 
 
 
 also include rebuilding the damaged facilities of aquaculture and stock e nhancement, rebuilding 
fish processing and local marketing facilities, a nd constructing the facilities for recovering the 
function of the damaged fishing ports.  
The aim of rebuilding the fishing vessels is for the workers in the fishing industry who suffered 
in the disaster to resume their business.   In any case, in the affected area by the tsuna mi, various resource management frameworks had 
been established before the disaster by the Gove rnment of Japan and by the local governments 
and they will continue to be valid and implemen ted even after the disaster. The degree of future 
recovery is not clear at this stage as stated in paragraph 21 of Secretariat’s Report.  
(5) Services 
(i) Financial Services  
Page 87, paragraph 46: The report states that cooperatives and mutual institutions (Kyosai) 
remain significant players in key parts of Japan’s  insurance market. In light of the regulatory 
and other advantages that Kyosai receive compared  to private insurance companies, why hasn’t 
Japan altered regulation of the Kyosai so that all are subject to full FSA regulatory oversight 
and take other steps that create parity with other insurance companie s?  When will Japan 
address this level playing field issue? 
 RESPONSE: Kyosai cooperative societies are mutual-a id organizations established by people 
in the same geographical area or field of work . The members invest their own capital and use 
the insurance services that the organization provid es. These services form part of a broad range 
of mutual-aid services available to the members (j oint ventures, loans, welfare services, etc.). 
Because of their unique nature they need to be  regulated separately, and each of them operates 
within the scope of the law and under the superv ision of the relevant government authorities. 
 In addition, mutual-aid activities being conducted by the agricultural cooperative society and the 
consumers' cooperative society, are regulated under the Agricultural  Cooperatives Act and the 
Consumer Cooperatives Act which have provisions  equivalent to those applied to private 
insurers, so that soundness of the business and consumer protection are guaranteed by prudent 
supervision such as careful reviews on the met hod for calculating the mutual aid premiums and 
the liability reserve.   
Page 87, paragraphs 46-48: The Secretariat re port notes the relative market dominance of Japan 
Post Insurance.  In light of the substantial adva ntages that Japan Post continues to have vis a vis 
private insurers, what plans does Japan have  to address outstanding concerns from trading 
partners and create a level playing field, including but not limited to: 1) equal access to a network comparable to that given to Japan Po st entities; 2) equal regulatory treatment and 
enforcement compared to private financial ser vices companies; 3) implementing measures to 
prevent cross-subsidization among the Japan Post businesses and related entities, and 4) 
refraining from allowing Japan Post Group to expa nd the scope of operations for its financial 
services companies before a level playing field is established?  RESPONSE: Measures to ensure equivalent conditions  of competition between the financial 
subsidiaries of Japan Post and other financial institu tions have been taken: It is stipulated in the 
Postal Services Privatization Act that equivale nt conditions of competition with enterprises 
engaged in like business operations should be ensured; Regulations a nd supervision under the 
Banking Act and the Insurance Business Act, are ap plied to Japan Post’s financial subsidiaries 
as is the case with other financial institutions, and,  in addition, these subsidiaries are required to 
gain approval from the FSA and the MIC fo r new products according to the PSPA. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 39 
 
 
 There has been no legal restriction on the Japan Post Services Company (JPSC) to sell insurance 
products other than that of the Japan Post Insu rance (JPI). In fact, some insurance companies 
other than the JPI have agency contracts with the JPSC to sell their insurance products through 
post offices. 
 
The accounting of the Japan Post Group compani es is clearly separated, in order to take 
measures to prevent cross-subsidization between  the JPSC businesses and related entities. In 
addition, just like other banks an d insurance companies, the Banki ng Act (Article 13-2) and the 
Insurance Business Act (Article 100-3) prohibits  trades with specified related parties under 
terms and conditions that are notably different from the ordinary conditions.(Arm’s length rule)  
 
Part II:  Questions on the Government Report 
 
Page 20, Paragraph 79:  Japan notes amendmen ts to the Customs Law whereby devices and 
programs that circumvent technological restric tion measures have been newly added to goods 
prohibited from being importe d or exported.  Please explain further which devices and 
programs are being targeted.   RESPONSE:  Devices prohibited to import/export under the Customs Law are stipulated in 
Items 10 and 11, Paragraph1, Article 2 of the Un fair Competition Prevention Law. The specific 
devices targeted are, for example, devices havi ng the function of canceling copy restriction 
technology or enabling the unauthorized recepti on of scrambled satellite broadcast, or data 
storage media on which programs having such function have been recorded. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 40 
 
 
 7. CHILE 
PREGUNTAS DE CHILE - TPR JAPON 2013 
 
Documentos: WT/TPR/S/276 y WT/TPR/G/276  
 
 Labour Issues (Pág. 92) 
 
Regarding document  WT/TPR/G/276, and rega rding Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), could 
Japan please tell: 
 
1. If social/labour issues in labour clauses or pa rallel labour agreements/MOUs (i.e. about 
migration issues) Question: Have been in troduced in any of FTAs Japan has signed? 
2. If yes, Question: Could Japan give a brief description of them and of their  implementation 
activities? 
 
RESPONSE:  Japan has never concluded any pa rallel labour agreement/MOU until now. 
Although there is no independent Chapte r on Labour in Japan’s EPA/FTAs, the 
Japan-Philippine EPA and Japan-Switzerland EPA incl ude the provision that it is inappropriate 
to encourage investment by weakening or reducin g the protections afforded in domestic labor 
laws.  
(References) 
Japan-Philippine EPA 
Article 103 Investment and Labor 1. The Parties recognize that it is inappropriate  to encourage investment by weakening or 
reducing the protections afforded in domestic labor  laws. Accordingly, each Party shall strive to 
ensure that it does not waive or otherwise derogate  from, or offer to waive or otherwise derogate 
from, such laws in a manner that weakens or reduces adherence to the internationally 
recognized labor rights referred to in para graph 2 below as an encouragement for the 
establishment, acquisition, expansion or retenti on of an investment in its Area. If a Party 
considers that the other Party has offered such an encouragement, it may request consultations 
with the other Party and the Parties shall c onsult with a view to avoiding any such 
encouragement. 
 2. For purposes of this Article, “labor laws” m eans each Party’s laws or regulations that are 
directly related to the following inte rnationally recognized labor rights: 
(a) the right of association; 
(b) the right to organize and bargain collectively; 
(c) a prohibition on the use of any form of forced or compulsory labor; 
(d) labor protections for children and young people, including a minimum age for the 
employment of children and the prohibition and elimination of the worst forms of child labor; and 
(e) acceptable conditions of work with resp ect to minimum wages, hours of work, and 
occupational safety and health. 
 
 “Capítulo III (3) (iv) Intellectual Property Rights”  
 
1. Considering the statement made in pa ragraph 82, Chile would welcome more 
information on the amendments ma de to copyright limitations. 
 
RESPONSE:  Japan amended its Copyright Act as follows;. 
(a) Creation of provisions regarding incidental appearance of something in a photo, etc Provisions that prescribe that the following activ ities of using copyrighted works do not infringe 
on copyrights, etc., are created.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 41 
 
 
 - Use of incidental copyrighted works  
- Use of copyrighted works that is deemed  necessary during the stage of carrying out 
examinations to obtain permission, etc.  
- Use of copyrighted works for trials for tec hnology development or practical application  
- Use of copyrighted works for information pr ocessing necessary for preparation for information 
provision through the use of information and communication technologies  
 (b) Creation of provisions regarding automatic pub lic transmission of library materials by the 
National Diet Library 
 
The National Diet Library may carry out automatic  public transmission of out-of-print materials 
and other library materials to libraries, etc. At th e same time, libraries, etc., may, at the request 
of users, partially reproduce out-of-print materi als and other library materials received from the 
National Diet Library through automatic public transmission.  
(c) Creation of provisions regarding the use of  copyrighted works based  on the Public Records 
and Archives Management Act, etc.  For purposes such as to provide co pyrighted works, etc., to the public in accordance with the 
provisions of the Public Records and Archives Management Act, etc., the President of the 
National Archives of Japan, etc., may, to the exte nt necessary, use the co pyrighted works, etc. 
 2. Due to the lack of a G.I. registration syst em, as stated in paragraph 152, Chile would 
welcome more information regarding the protec tion of foreign G.I.  recognized in trade 
agreements. 
 
RESPONSE:  In Japan, GIs including foreign GIs are protected under the Trademarks Act and 
the Unfair Competition Prevention Act. Additiona l protection for GIs for wines and spirits is 
provided in the Standard for Indication in Re lation to Geographical Indications based on the 
Law Concerning Liquor Business Association and Measures for Securing Revenue from Liquor 
Tax. 
 
(Trademarks Act) Concerning Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement, trademarks that contain GIs including foreign 
GIs or that consist of GIs, which may cause mi sunderstanding of origin (quality of goods), are 
rejected or invalidated based on Article 4 (1) (xvi) of the Trademark Act. 
 
With regard to “Additional Protection for GIs fo r Wines and Spirits” (Article 23 of the TRIPS 
Agreement), for trademarks that indicate the orig in of wines or spirits produced in Japan or a 
WTO Member, the trademarks prohibited in the Me mber to be used for wines or spirits not 
originating in a region of the Member and used for wines or spirits not originating in a region in the Member, are rejected or invalidated based on Article 4 (1) (xvii) of the Trademark Act. 
 
(The Unfair Competition Prevention Act) Article 2 (1) (xiii) of the Unfair Compe tition Prevention Act prohibits the acts of 
misrepresenting information regarding the place of  origin, including foreig n GIs, on goods in a 
manner that is likely to mislead the public. 
 
(The Standard for Indication in Relation to Geogr aphical Indications (hereinafter referred to as 
“the Standards”)  In accordance with the Standards, an indication for wines and spirits is protected without any 
designation as GIs in Japan, in cases where the indication satisfies the requirement provided for WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 42 
 
 
 in the provisions of paragraph 1 of the Artic le 22 of the TRIPS Agreement and where the 
territory, region or a locality related to th e indication is of a Member of the WTO. 
 Besides, some Japanese EPAs have lists of the indications of the places of origin for spirits 
which are agreed to be GIs within the meani ng of paragraph 1 of Article 22 of the TRIPS 
Agreement by the both parties as their annex.  T hose lists are not the exhaustive lists of the GIs 
of the parties.  3. Chile would welcome more information regardi ng the statement made in paragraph 171 that 
states that Japan prosecutes its interests in in ternational harmonization of IP systems. Chile 
would appreciate to know more about the standards considered for the harmonization 
process. 
 RESPONSE: Japan has been contributing to various discussions on the development of IP 
system at international fora including WIPO a nd WTO. Particularly, Japan has made efforts for 
the advancement of the patent harmonization discussions that became more active after the 
America lnvents Act was passed in 2011.  The Tegernsee Group, which is composed of pate nt offices of Denmark, France, Germany, UK, 
US and Japan, and the European Patent Offi ces, was established in 2011. The Group is now 
focusing on four issues, namely, the grace period, 18-month publication, conflicting 
applications and prior user rights. At the same time, Japan is also engaging in the discussions on 
harmonization among the IP5, which is composed of  the European Patent Office, Japan Patent 
Office, Korean Intellectual Property Office, Stat e Intellectual Property Office of the People's 
Republic of China and the United States Patent and Trademark Office. 
 
4. Regarding paragraph 173, Chile  would welcome more information about the protection of 
genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. Chile would appreciate more 
information regarding the implemen tation of the Nagoya Protocol. 
 RESPONSE: The Government of Japan has been prom oting in-situ and ex-situ protection of 
genetic resources through a variety of measures such as designation of protected areas and 
development and improvement of collections.  As one of the national targets, “The Nati onal Biodiversity Strategy of Japan 2012-2020” 
mentions that the Government of Japan “aims to  ratify the Nagoya Protocol as early as possible 
and implement domestic measures for this protocol by 2015 at the latest”.  
 The Government of Japan is currently c onsidering the measures necessary for domestic 
implementation of the Nagoya Protocol, including the possibility of administrative or policy measures as well as legislative measures, while fully hearing opinions from relevant stakeholders such as industry, academia and NGO/NPOs.    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 43 
 
 
 8. SOUTH AFRICA 
 
QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF SOUTH AFRICA 
 
REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT (WT/TPR/S/276) 
 
Financial Services  Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (5) Servi ces (i) Financial Services: Paragraph 50, Page 
88  
 
With reference to the privatization of the Japan Post Group, the Secretariat Report points out 
that: ‘The Japanese authorities explained that the revised Postal Service Privatization Act had a 
provision to ensure equivalent conditions of  competition between the Japan Post Group and 
operators offering similar services’. 
 
1. Would Japan elaborate on what this provision is and how it will ensure 
competition?  
RESPONSE:  With regard to new products by the Japan Post Bank and the Japan Post 
Insurance (here in after referred to as “financi al subsidiaries”), the provisions of the Banking 
Act and the Insurance Business Act apply in th e same way as other financial institutions. In 
addition, the Postal Services Privatization Act provides “add-on regulations” which require 
equivalent conditions of comp etition with other financial in stitutions to be ensured. 
 
As seen above, the equivalent conditions of competition are secured between the financial 
subsidiaries and other financial institutions im plementing the following provisions: Article 2, 
paragraph 2 of Article 7, Article 8, item 4 of pa ragraph 1 of Article 19, Article 62, Article 104, 
Article 105, Article 107, Article 110, Article 110-2, Article 134, Article 135, Article 137, 
Article 138 and Article 138-2 of the Postal Se rvice Privatization Act (Act No. 97 of 2005). 
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (5) Services (i) Financial Services: Table IV.7, Page 89  
 
The Secretariat Report notes that, for prudential reasons, the establishment of a secondary office 
a foreign bank requires the authorization of the Pr ime Minister, while a local bank is subject to a 
notification.   
 
2. Would Japan elaborate, fr om a prudential perspective, on the rationale behind the 
considerable difference between these requi rements for foreign and local banks?  
 
RESPONSE: Currently, Japan’s deposit insurance sy stem does not cover deposits taken by 
foreign bank branches. Thus, in order to pr otect depositors, there is a difference, from a 
prudential perspective, between foreign banks and locally incorporated banks in terms of 
requirements for establishing sub-branches. 
 
Telecommunications 
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (5) Serv ices (ii) Telecommunications: Paragraph 66, 
Page 95  
 The Secretariat report notes that ‘carriers whose activities go beyond the boundaries of a single 
prefecture are considered as registered operato rs.  Registration formalities and procedures with 
the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication (MIC) are minimal’  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 44 
 
 
 3. Would Japan elaborate on whether any distinction is drawn between foreign and 
local enterprises when it comes to the registration of carriers? 
 
RESPONSE:  There is no distinction between foreign and the enterprises when it comes to the 
registration procedures under the Telecommunications Business Act. 
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (5) Serv ices (ii) Telecommunications: Paragraph 67, 
Page 95   
The Secretariat Report highlights that there are 330  carriers subject to registrations and 15 482 
carriers subject to notification. 
 
4. Would Japan indicate the number or percentage of foreign enterprises subject to 
registration and notification respectively? 
 
RESPONSE: As we answered in Q3, there is no distinction between foreign and local 
enterprises regarding registration and notifica tion procedure under the Telecommunications 
Business Act and thus we have no grasp of the number of foreign enterprises subject to registration and notification.  
Construction services 
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (5) Servi ces (iv) Construction: Paragraph 96, Page 105 
 
The Secretariat Report notes mentions that a rela tively large number (117) of foreign affiliates 
are licensed in Japan.  5. Out of the 117 foreign affiliates licensed in Japan, how many have successfully bid for public contracts in the past 5 years? 
 
RESPONSE: Japan does not have comprehensive data on the number of foreign affiliates that 
have successfully bid for public contracts. 
 
Distribution services 
 Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (5) Servi ces (v) Distribution: Table IV.19, Legislation 
on Exclusive Rights or on Limitati ons of number of suppliers, Page 108 
 The Secretariat Report notes that “the Wholesale Market Law introduces a license system which 
stipulates some conditions for the application of licenses.  
6. Can Japan give more information as to what these conditions are? 
 
RESPONSE:  1. Wholesalers 
Any person who intends to wholesale in a central wholesale market shall obtain permission (a license) of the Minister of Agri culture, Forestry and Fisheries. 
In the following cases, permission shall not be granted: a. Applicant is not a juridical person. 
b. Applicant who has been senten ced to punishment by fine pursuant to the provision of the 
Wholesale Markets Law, where three years ha ve not elapsed from the date that the 
execution expired or the date he/she became no longer subject to the execution. 
c. Applicant has had permission revoked under the overseeing provision of the Wholesale 
Markets Law, where three years have not elapsed from the date of the annulment.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 45 
 
 
 d. If the applicant includes an executive who fa lls under any of the following categories: 
i. A bankrupt person who has not had his/her rights reinstated. 
ii. A person who has been sentenced to impris onment or to a fine pursuant to the 
Wholesale Markets Law, where three years have not elapsed from the date on which 
execution of the sentence ended or the sentence ceased effect. 
iii. A person who was an executive of a juridi cal person who has had permission revoked 
when the matter that caused the rescission o ccurred, and three years have not lapsed 
from the date of the rescission. 
iv. A person who was ordered to be discharged from a juridical position under the 
overseeing provision of the Wholesale Markets Law, with three years having not 
elapsed from the date of discharge. 
 e. Applicant does not have necessary knowledge a nd experience to ensure adequate execution 
of wholesale activities in the central wholesale markets. 
f. Applicant’s net assets are less th an the Base Net Assets (1 million yen to 1.2 billion yen) set 
forth by items and handling scale specified by the Wholesale Markets Law. 
g. When the number of wholesalers granted perm ission has already exceeded the limit of the 
maximum number of wholesalers allowed, as specifi ed by the operational rule of the central 
wholesale market prescribed by the establishment authority. 
 
2. Intermediate Wholesalers 
a. Any person who intends to partake in interm ediate wholesale in the central wholesale markets 
shall obtain the permission of the establishment authority (local governments). 
b. The establishment authority shall prescribe pr ovisions for persons who intend to partake in 
intermediate wholesale in accordance with operational rules. 
 Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (5) Servi ces (v) Distribution: Table IV.19, Legislation 
on the establishment of Large Scale Stores, Page 107 
 
7. Can Japan elaborate on the procedures to  establish and operate Large-Scale Retail 
Stores? 
 RESPONSE: Under the Act on the Measures by Large-Scale Retail Stores for Preservation of 
the Living Environment ，any person establishing a new large-scale retail store should notify 
the prefecture where the store is to be located. 
 
8. Can Japan confirm that the Act on “Mea sures by Large-Scale Retailers Stores for 
Preservation of the Living Environment” app lies equally to foreign and domestic firms? 
 
RESPONSE: Yes. It applies equally to foreign and domestic firms. 
 (v) Competition policy (page 69) (vi) Export cartels and voluntary export restraints (Page 48) 
 
While export cartels are exempted from the general prohibition of cartels under Japan's 
Anti-monopoly Act, the authorities indicate th at there are no known export cartels in Japan.2 
 
9. Explain what are the purported benefits  of allowing export cartels under the 
Anti-monopoly Act?  
                                                 
2 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. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 46 
 
 
 RESPONSE: The 1st clause of Article 5 and the 2nd clause of Article 11 of the Export and 
Import Transaction Law allowsprovides for an e xport cartels. These provisions are accepted for 
the purpose of the achievement of the sound deve lopment of foreign trade by preventing unfair 
export transactions and establishing the order of  export transactions and import transactions. 
 
10. What is the criterion that an export cartel must satisfy before it can obtain approval 
from the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry?  
RESPONSE: Based on the 2st clause of Article 5 of the Export and Import Transaction Law, 
the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry mu st order change or prohibition of an export 
cartel if it does not suit the following provisions.  There are no known export cartels in Japan.   1 An export cartel shall not violate the treaties and the agreements which are concluded with 
foreign governments and international authorities 
2 An export cartel shall not harm the interests of importers or related business destinations and 
significantly damage the international credibility of Japanese exporters. 
3 In addition to what is listed in the preced ing two items, an export cartel shall not hinder the 
sound development of export transactions. 4 An export cartel shall not include any unjust discriminative contents 5 An export cartel shall not unjustly restrict par ticipation in the agreement or withdrawal from 
it. 
6 An export cartel shall not unjustly harm the inte rests of the domestic agriculture, forestry and 
fishery operators, related small and medium sized  enterprise operators, other related operators or 
general consumers. 
 
(c) Holding companies, and mergers and acquisitions (page 70) 
184. Chapter 4 of the AMA prohibits mergers and acquisitions if they lead to a substantial 
restraint on competition.
3   
 
11. By definition, mergers and acquisitions will culminate in a change of market 
structure. Explain what is the criterion that  Japan applies to determine whether a merged 
or acquired entity “…can control the market by influencing variables such as price, 
quality, and quantity”?  
RESPONSE:  The JFTC has established the “Guidelines to Application of the Antimonopoly 
Act Concerning Review of Business Combination”  to improve transparency and predictability 
regarding the review of business unions. The Guid elines, which are published in the link below, 
provide detailed descriptions relate d to the question. Please refer to the Chapter III, IV, and V of 
the Guidelines. 
 
F
OREIGN INVESTMENT REGIME (PAGE 19) 
Inward FDI in Japan continues to  be much lower than outward FDI, and is also relatively low 
compared with that in other large OECD econom ies.  The continued low level of FDI may be 
attributed to factors such as the appreciati ng exchange rate, high costs of doing business in 
Japan, and regulatory barriers.4  The authorities consider that the main reasons include the 
difficulty involved in hiring qualified employees;  high business costs in Japan5;  and high 
customer expectations.  On the other hand, Japan's  trading partners indicated in the past that it 
may be attributed, inter alia,  to impediments to mergers and acquisitions;  insufficient 
                                                 
3 "Substantial restraint" on competition is when  a market structure changes as a result of a 
merger, and specific companies can control the market by influencing variables such as price, quality, and 
quantity. 
4 WTO (2001). 
5 The recent appreciation of the yen may have helped increase the net outflow of FDI in Japan.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 47 
 
 
 regulatory reform and financial transparency and flexibility;  and lack of flexibility in the 
labour market.  
12. Is Japan reviewing impediments to mergers and acquisitions as reported by its 
trading partners? 
 
RESPONSE: It is difficult to answer the question as the Secretariat’s report does not specify 
“impediments to mergers and acquisitions” clear ly. However, the Government of Japan is 
currently implementing policies to promote FDI into Japan. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 48 
 
 
 9. REPUBLIC OF KOREA 
 PART I: Questions Regarding the Secretariat Report 
 
II. Trade Policies Regime : Framework and Objectives 
 
Page 19 (Para 34) 
 (…..) Besides the approval (prior notification)  requirements under the Foreign Exchange and 
Foreign Trade Act, various other laws of Japan s tipulate specific restrictions on inward FDI in 
certain sectors, including the acquisition of land, mining, oil industry, telecommunications, and transport.  Question 1 
 
With regard to prior notification and approval required for inward FDI in telecommunications 
(accompanying certain network facilities) and br oadcasting sectors in Japan, please provide the 
reason for requiring such prior notification and approval in the telecommunications sector and 
indicate whether it has any plan to remove this requirement.   
RESPONSE:  The telecommunications sector assumes th e core role to underpin the economy 
and livelihood of the people and has relevance to  maintain the fundamental functions such as 
police and disaster prevention. Broadcasting is the essential sector to convey necessary information to the people quickly in times of di saster or national security emergency. For these 
reasons, Japan requires the prior notification and approval under the Foreign Exchange and 
Foreign Trade Act and doesn’t have a plan to remove the requirement. 
 Question 2 
 With regard to the prior notification requireme nt of inward FDI, please provide the specific 
criteria for approval.  In addition, please provide  any cases in which a request for approval has 
been denied in telecommunications and broadcasting sectors. 
 RESPONSE:  The criteria for screening inward FDI under the Foreign Exchange and Foreign 
Trade Act are whether an investment could cau se one of the following situations: -National 
security is impaired 
 
-The maintenance of public order is disturbed -The protection of public is hindered, or -Significant adverse effect is brought to the smooth management of the Japanese economy. With regard to the telecommunications and broadcasting sector, there is no case of denial.  
III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure 
 
Page 33 (Para 33) 
 Japan is a party to the WTO Agreement on Go vernment Procurement (GPA).  During the 
period under review, Japan made no tifications under the GPA on: national legislation, statistics 
for the period 2009 and 2010, and modificati ons to Appendix I.  All proposals for 
modifications to Appendix I notified sinc e January 2009 have been certified. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 49 
 
 
 Question 3 
 
Japan's GPA Appendix I, Notes to Annex 3, para 4 (a) states "procurement related to 
operational safety of transportation is not include d". Could Japan provide the text of domestic 
laws and regulations with regard to the notes? 
 Please elaborate on 'procurement related to  operational safety of transportation'. 
 RESPONSE:  There is no such text as Korea requested. Note 4(a) places procurements of 
products and services related to operational safety of  transportation out of the coverage of the 
GPA, taking into consideration characteristics of Japanese railways.  Page 41 (Para 55) 
 The authorities stated that Japan has amended its  safety and environmental regulations for road 
vehicles to align them with regulations under th e UN Agreement dealing with the adoption of 
Uniform Technical Prescriptions for Wheeled Vehicles, Equipment and Parts which can be fitted and/or be used on Wheeled Vehicles ( 1958 Agreement). As a result, Japan has amended 
technical requirements for, inter alia, seatbelts and headlights since 2010. 
 
Question 4 
 
Could Japan provide the text of the amended safety and environmental regulations for road 
vehicles and technical requirements for the items concerned?   
RESPONSE:  The text can be found at: http://www.mlit.go.jp/jidosha/jidosha_fr7_000007.html  
(in Japanese only) 
 Page 57 (Para 124) 
 Against this background, the National IP St rategic 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 intensify their efforts in international 
standard-setting processes, particularly in sev en technological fields: advanced medical 
technologies, water, next generation vehicles, ra ilway, energy management, digital contents, and 
robotics. 
 
Question 5 
 Could Japan elaborate on its support policy for the public and private sectors to set international 
standards in the seven technological fields as mentioned above?  
RESPONSE:   Since 2010, Japan has developed specific strategies including some support 
policies in each of the seven fields through discu ssions in the Task Force which consists of 
experts from various fields. However, these strate gies are confidential since they are strongly 
related to the interest of relevant entities in Japan.  
Page 64 (Para 156) 
 
In February 2010, the Government establis hed three committees (the Basic Issues 
Subcommittee, the Legislative Issues Subcommitt ee, and the International Subcommittee) to 
discuss various copyright issues emerging from th e digital age. These committees attempted to 
identify legal uncertainties in the current copyright system, which limited innovation and 
application of new digital technologies, su ch as cloud computing and data mining. The WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 50 
 
 
 Legislative Issues Subcommittee works mainly  on how to accommodate some unlicensed 
copying through further extension of limitations and exceptions to copyright. In 2003, Japan 
issued three free-use marks with  the purpose of promoting smooth distribution of copyrighted 
works in the internet ag e. These marks indicate that copyright owners allow the free use of their 
copyrighted works subject to certain conditions. 
 Question 6 
 Could Japan further elaborate on the legal status  and function of the three committees (the Basic 
Issues Subcommittee, the Legislative Issu es Subcommittee, and the International 
Subcommittee)?  In particular, please inform us whether the committees have any enforcement 
functions.   RESPONSE:  Three subcommittees (the Basic Issues Subcommittee, the Legislative Issues 
Subcommittee, and the Interna tional Subcommittee), which are set up in the Subdivision on 
Copyright of the Council for Cultural Affairs ( CCA), are the subcommittees that are based on 
the decision by the Subdivision on Copyright of CCA. CCA is set up based on Article 30 of the 
Act for Establishment of the Ministry of Edu cation, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, 
and the Subdivision on Copyright of CCA is set up based on Article 5.1 of the cabinet order of 
CCA. 
 The Legislative Issues Subcommittee deliberates on the issues regarding the legal system of 
copyrights. The International Subcommittee delib erates on the issues regarding the international 
rule-making and the handling of cross-border pirating activities. The Basic Issues 
Subcommittee, which was set up in 2009 and 201 0, deliberated on the basic issues regarding 
copyright-related policies, however it has not been set up after 2011.  Question 7 
 Please explain how the Government develops th e results of the discussion undertaken in those 
committees. Could Japan provide any examples in  which the Government has reflected the 
results of the committees’ discussi on in its copyright policies?  
 RESPONSE:  Concerning the results of the discussions in the Subdivision on Copyright of 
CCA, the Cabinet proposes a bill regarding issues wh ich are appropriate to amend the law. After 
the deliberation of the Diet, the bill becomes a law. For example, the Subdivision on Copyright 
of CCA reported in March 2011 that the lega l system regarding technological protection 
measures should be put on review. After the inter-governmental coordination process based on 
that report and the deliberation of the Diet, the amendments of the Copyright Act which include 
the content of the report were enacted in June 2012.  
IV. Trade Policies by Sector 
 
Page 85 (Para 42) 
 Against the background of a severe accident at a nuclear power plant in the north-eastern Japan 
in March 2011, the Government is reviewing wh ether to adopt regulatory reform, such as the 
establishment of an independent national grid co mpany and further liberalization of retail sales. 
 Question 8 
 
Could Japan provide its energy policy directi on in terms of renewable energy as well as any 
programs for encouraging the use of renewable energy?    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 51 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  After the implementation of feed-in-tari ff (FIT) in July 2012, renewable energy, 
especially PV is rapidly expanding in Japan. In addition, now we are planning to undertake the 
grid expansion for expl oring much more wind power and development of large scale storage 
battery technology. 
 
Page 95 (Para 68) 
 According to the NTT Law, the Japanese Government must hold at least 33.3% of the NTT shares and foreign investment in NTT is limited to 33.3%. 
 
Question 9 
 Could Japan provide the reason for maintaining st rict investment restrictive measures such as 
that of foreign share limit and public ownershi p in NTT? Please indicate whether Japan has any 
plans to lift the strict foreign investment rest rictions applied to NTT in the near future.  
 
RESPONSE:  Given NTT’s important public role such  as responsibility of providing universal 
services, promoting research and disseminating research results, the government becomes the 
stable shareholder in order to prevent any domination of NTT management or abuse of 
shareholder rights by specific entities and ensu re the stability of company management and 
appropriate business operations. From these reas ons, the government is obliged to hold the 
shares of NTT.  NTT is a shareholder of NTT East and NTT West which provide most of the communications infrastructures that serve as a foundation of social  activity. Foreign investment restrictions 
applied to NTT, which is deeply related to national security, have the purpose of avoiding 
possible national security issues and influences caus ed by control by foreign countries.  There 
is no plan to either relax or abo lish the above measure at this point. 
 Page 97 (Para 70) 
 
According to the Anti-Monopoly Act (AMA) and the "Guidelines Concerning the Interpretation 
of Specific Business Field as Defined in the Pr ovisions of Monopolis tic Situation in the 
Anti-Monopoly Act", the JFTC supervises and regulates the telecommunications sector as one of the monopolistic industry.  
Question 10 
 
Could Japan elaborate on the competition promotion policies applied to the telecommunications sector by the JFTC?   RESPONSE:  Enterprises in the telecommunications se ctor are subject to the Antimonopoly Act 
in the same manner as those in other sectors, and there is no sector-specific competition policies 
applied to the telecommunications sector. JFTC , strictly enforcing the Antimonopoly Act, has 
eliminated anticompetitive practices in the telecommunications sector in view of promoting fair and free competition. JFTC continues to stick to this basic principle.  
In addition, JFTC and MIC have published the “Guidelines for Promotion of Competition in the 
Telecommunications Business Field”, and in the Guidelines JFTC clarifies business practices 
that would adversely affect competition in the telecommunications sector, showing cases that the carriers would possibly face. The Guidelin es also explain business practices constituting 
problems under the Telecommunications Business Law overseen by MIC.  
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 52 
 
 
 (Reference) 
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/legislation_guidelines/ama/pdf/telecom.pdf  
 
Page 97 (Para 72) 
 In Japan, contributors of universal service fund are providers interconnected with facilities 
installed by NTT East or NTT West and whose a nnual sales are more than  ¥1 billion. Universal 
service covers subscriber telephone services a nd, since April 2011, optical IP services 
equivalent to subscriber services, in addition to public telephone services and emergency calls.  
 
Question 11 
 In Korea, facilities and non-facilities telecomm unications service providers whose annual sales 
are more than ₩30 billion are required to contribute to the universal service fund.  
 
Please provide the grounds for the decision by the Japanese Government that providers whose 
annual sales are more than ¥1 billion have to contribute to universal service fund.  In addition, please indicate the criteria and detailed procedures for the calculation of the amount of compensation to be applied to each provider.   
RESPONSE:  “¥1 billion annual sales” was set based on  the report from the Information and 
Communications Council (Council) of October 2005 . The report says there seems to be enough 
telecommunications carriers with business bases whose annual sales are more than ¥1 billion 
and afford to contribute to the fund.  
The services subject to compensation are anal og fixed-line phones (local loop access), Type I 
payphones, and emergency calls. The amount of th e compensation rate is calculated as follows. 
(a) analog fixed-line phones  The cost of each local loop line is calculated by  the using long run incremental cost (LRIC). 
Applying the bench mark method for the top 4.9%  of the high-cost regions, when the cost per 
line exceeds the national average cost + 2 standard deviations, part of the cost will be covered 
by the universal service fund. 
(b) Category I public telephone service About the cost for the Category I public tele phone which is calculated by LRIC, the part 
surpassing the corresponding income is subject to the compensation. (c) emergency calls 
Portion equivalent to the top 4.9% of the local loop line cost is compensated. 
 Detailed procedures for the calculation of the amount of compensation are as follows. (a) According to the method prescribed in an ordina nce of the Ministry of International Affairs 
and Communications (e.g. LRIC), eligible te lecommunications carriers calculate the cost 
price for the universal service and profit and submit them to the universal service support 
institution.  
(b) According to a method (such as the 4.9% me thod) prescribed in an ordinance of the 
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communica tions, the universal service support institution 
calculates the amount of compensation amount and money, and makes authorization application to the Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications. 
(c) The Minister of Internal Affairs and Communications authorizes the application  after 
confirming that it is consistent with the ordina nce of Ministry of International Affairs and 
Communications, and after the consultation with the Council. 
 Page 107 (Para 99) 
Several major foreign distributors are present in Japan (e.g. Wal-Mart, Metro, H and M). There 
are no economic needs tests for the establishmen t of supermarkets, but there is zoning   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 53 
 
 
 legislation at both national and local levels. Fo reign distributors have, in certain instances, 
complained that the implementation of those lo cal regulations was not always consistent and 
transparent towards foreign distributors, an a llegation denied by the Japanese authorities. There 
is no specific regime for franchising and no di scrimination towards foreign franchisors and 
franchisees. There have been no major regulat ory changes since 2008. The generic competition 
legislation, i.e. the Anti-Monopoly Act (AMA) applies to the sector, but guidelines related to 
the sector have been devised by the Japan Fair Trade commission. 
 Question 12 
 The issue of zoning legislation has been controvers ial with regard to the question of whether it 
violates the GATS. What are the main reasons  for and the legal basis of the Japanese 
government’s enforcement the zoning legislation in its distribution service market?  RESPONSE:  Zoning regulation restricts the use of a building, the FAR (Floor Area Ratio), 
building height, etc. by land use zoning. It is aimed at promoting  efficiency of civic functions 
and forming a good city environment by means of  appropriate zoning for housing, commerce, 
industry, etc. based on the perspec tive of the future of the city. 
 Legal basis: Building Standard Law and City Planning Act 
 
Page 108 (Para 100) 
The trade regime for distribution services is basi cally open and devoid of restrictions, except for 
a series of products or types of distribution for which licences may be limited and investment subject to notification depending on the agre ement concerned (GATS and various FTAs). The 
GATS commitments are unbound whatever the s ubsector of distribution for petroleum, 
petroleum products, rice, tobacco salt, alcoholic  beverages, and products supplied at public 
wholesale markets.   Question 13 
 
Could Japan provide the details regarding ‘public  wholesale markets’ such as the definition, the 
list of the markets, the produc ts supplied and its operation? 
 RESPONSE:  The details regarding “Public (Cen tral) Wholesale Markets” are as follows: 
1) Definition of Central Wholesale Markets 
A Central Wholesale Market is a core b ase of wholesale activity that secures smooth 
distribution of products such as fresh food to especially important cities and their surrounding 
areas. Moreover, Central Wholesale Markets are established by cities with a population of more than 200,000, or a group of local governments whic h includes at least one city with a population 
of more than 200,000, upon authorization from the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. 
 
Note: The definition of a local government group is stipulated in Article 284 of the Law on 
Local Autonomy. (Law on Local Autonomy http://law.e-gov.go.jp/cgi-bin/idxselect.cgi?IDX_OPT=1&H_  
NAME=%92%6e%95%fb%8e%a9%8e%a1%96%40&H_NAME_YOMI=%82%a0&H_NO_G
ENGO=H&H_NO_YE AR=&H_NO_TYPE=2&H_NO_NO=&H_FILE_NAME=S22HO067&
H_RYAKU=1&H_CTG=1&H_YOMI_GUN=1&H_CTG_GUN=1 ) 
(Wholesale Market 
Law: http://law.e-gov.go.jp/cgi-bin/idxselect .cgi?IDX_OPT=1&H_ NAME=%89%b5%94%84%
8e%73%8f%ea%96%40&H_NAME_YOMI=% 82%a0&H_NO_GENGO=H&H_NO_YEAR=
&H_NO_TYPE=2&H_NO_NO=&H_FILE_NAM E=S46HO035&H_RYAKU=1&H_CTG=1&
H_YOMI_GUN=1&H_CTG_GUN=1 ) WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 54 
 
 
 2) List of Central Wholesale Markets (72 Central Wholesale Markets) 
Sapporo Central Wholesale Market  Nagoya City Central Wholesale Market, 
Nambu market 
Aomori City Central Wholesale Market Kyoto City Central Wholesale Market, Daiichi 
market 
Hachinohe City Central Wholesale Market Kyoto City Central Wholesale Market, Daini 
market 
Morioka City Central Wholesale Market Osaka Prefecture Central Wholesale Market 
Sendai City Central Wholesale Market, Honjo Osaka City Central Wholesale Market, Honjo 
Sendai City Central Wholesale Market, 
Shokuniku market  Osaka City Central Wholesale Market, Tobu 
market 
Akita City Central Wholesale Market Osaka City Central Wholesale Market, Nanko 
market 
Fukushima City Central Wholesale Market  Kobe City Central Wholesale Market, Honjo 
Iwaki City Central Wholesale Market Kobe City Central Wholesale Market, Tobu 
market 
Utsunomiya City Central Wholesale Market Kobe City Central Wholesale Market, Seibu 
market 
Saitama City Shokuniku Central Wholesale Market Himeji City Central Wholesale Market 
Chiba City Central Wholesale Market Nara Prefecture Central Wholesale Market 
Funabashi City Central Wholesale Market Wakayama City Central Wholesale Market 
Tokyo Metropolis Central Wholesale 
Market, Tsukiji market Okayama City Central Wholesale Market 
Tokyo Metropolis Central Wholesale 
Market, Toshima market Hiroshima City Central Wholesale Market, 
Chuo market 
Tokyo Metropolis Central Wholesale Market, Yodobashi market Hiroshima City Central Wholesale Market, 
Tobu market 
Tokyo Metropolis Central Wholesale Market, Adachi market Hiroshima City Central Wholesale Market, 
Shokuniku market 
Tokyo Metropolis Central Wholesale Market, Shokuniku market Utsunomiya City Central Wholesale Market 
Tokyo Metropolis Central Wholesale 
Market, Itabashi market Tokushima City Central Wholesale Market 
Tokyo Metropolis Central Wholesale 
Market, Setagaya market Takamatsu City Central Wholesale Market 
Tokyo Metropolis Central Wholesale 
Market, Kitaadachi market Matsuyama City Central Wholesale Market 
Tokyo Metropolis Central Wholesale 
Market, Tama new town market Kochi City Central Wholesale Market 
Tokyo Metropolis Central Wholesale 
Market, Kasai market Kitakyushu City Central Wholesale Market 
Tokyo Metropolis Central Wholesale 
Market, Ota market Fukuoka City Central Wholesale Market, 
Sengyo market 
Yokohama City Central Wholesale Market, Honjo Fukuoka City Central Wholesale Market, Seika 
market 
Yokohama City Central Wholesale Market, Nambu market Fukuoka City Central Wholesale Market, Seibu 
market 
Yokohama City Central Wholesale Market, Shokuniku market Fukuoka City Central Wholesale Market, Tobu 
market   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 55 
 
 
 Kawasaki City Central Wholesale Market, 
Hokubu market Fukuoka City Central Wholesale Market, 
Shokuniku market  
Shizuoka City Central Wholesale Market Kurume City Central Wholesale Market 
Hamamatsu City Central Wholesale Market Nagasaki City Central Wholesale Market 
Niigata City Central Wholesale Market Sasebo City Central Wholesale Market, 
Hizukushi market 
Kanazawa City Central Wholesale Market Sasebo City Central Wholesale Market, Suisan 
market 
Fukui City Central Wholesale Market Miyazaki City Central Wholesale Market 
Gifu City Central Wholesale Market Kagoshima City Central Wholesale Market, 
Seika market 
Nagoya City Central Wholesale Market Kagoshima City Central Wholesale Market, 
Gyorui market 
Nagoya City Central Wholesale Market, Hokubu market Okinawa Prefecture Central Wholesale Market 
 
3) Items Fruits, vegetables, marine products, meats, flowers and processed foods 
 
4) Operation of the Central Wholesale Market 
・Establishing authority 
A person who establishes a wholesale market and ma nages maintenance, business duties, etc. of 
the market. The establishing authority is a local government which has the authorization of the 
Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. 
・Wholesaler 
A wholesaler is a person who participates as a seller in market activities.  A wholesaler 
distributes products collected from producing areas to intermediate wholesalers and/or authorized buyers. A wholesaler is a juridicial  person (i.e. from a corporation) who has the 
permission of the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. 
 
・Intermediate wholesaler 
Intermediate wholesalers buy products from whol esalers and sell them to authorized buyers. 
Intermediate wholesalers are corporations or individuals who have the permission of the 
establishing authority. 
 
・Authorized buyer 
An authorized buyer is a person who participates as a buyer.  Authorized buyers buy products 
from wholesalers and/or intermediate wholesalers. An authorized buyer is a corporation or an 
individual who has the approval of the establishing authority. 
 
PART II: Questions Regarding the Government Report 
 
II. Trade and Investment Policy 
 
Page 12 (Para 29) 
The Economic Harmonization Initiative aims to contribute to the two countries’ economic 
growth by promoting cooperation to harmonize approaches that facilitate trade, address the 
business climate and individual issues, and advan ce coordination on regional issues of common 
interest. Under this Initiative, the two Govern ments held a series of constructive discussions 
which covered a wide range of topics under the following four themes: (1) exchanging 
information on trade and economic-related policies of Japan and the U.S.; (2) promoting further 
Japan-U.S. cooperation in the economic field; (3) collaborating on common regional and global WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 56 
 
 
 challenges; and 4) taking new steps to facilita te trade and to address the business climate and 
other issues. On 27 January 2012, the Japanese a nd the U.S. Governments publicized a “Record 
of Discussion” that summarized the general scope of bilateral discussions and exchanges as well 
as identified key outcomes of this work th at took place over the period of February 
2011-January 2012. 
 Question 14 
 Could Japan provide further information concerning topics and key outcomes of the bilateral 
discussions which have taken place under the Ec onomic Harmonization Initiative since January 
2012?  Please indicate topics or issues the Japanese Government would like to discuss in the 
near future.  RESPONSE: Since January 2012, no bilateral meeting has been held under the Economic 
Harmonization Initiative. Both governments w ill consider topics and issues for future 
discussions, taking into account the outcome of previous discussions and current bilateral 
economic relations.  Page 13 (Para 35) 
The Japanese Government established Japan Cent res in six Russian c ities, through which it 
offers technical assistance aimed at cultivating a nd training personnel who are expected to play 
an important role in the Russian economy a nd Japan-Russia business and economic relations. 
The Centres also proactively support business ac tivities by providing institutional and corporate 
information, offering consulting services, etc. in order to promote business relations between companies of the two countries.  
 
Question 15 
 Could Japan inform us as to whether “Japan Ce ntres” are set up in other countries? Could Japan 
elaborate on the programs which the “Japan Centres” carry out in Russian cities?  
 
RESPONSE: Other than Russia, nine “Japan Centres” have been established in eight countries: 
Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Ukraine, Mongolia, Cambodia, Vietnam and 
Laos. Japan Centres in Russia organize semina rs and lectures for Russian business personnel on 
various business topics such as “Management of SME”, “Quality control”, and “Personnel management” by dispatching Japanese experts as l ecturers in response to needs and requests by 
the Russian side. They also provide opportunities to join the training programs offered in Japan 
for Russian business personnel organized by th e Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan. 
 Page 13 (Para 37) 
In December 2011, Prime Minister Noda e xpressed “Six Initiatives to further deepen a 
‘Mutually Beneficial Relationship based on Comm on Strategic Interests’ on the occasion of the 
40th anniversary of the normalization of diplom atic relations between Japan and China” during 
his visit to China. In line with the initiatives above, in May 2012, both leaders shared the view 
to further develop mutually beneficial econo mic relations in the fields of Finance, 
Energy-Saving and Environment, Tourism, Inte llectual Property Rights, Agriculture and air 
transportation, etc. Regarding financial coopera tion, direct exchange markets between yen and 
renminbi started on 1 June 2012 in the Tokyo and Shanghai Markets. 
 Question 16 
 Could Japan provide an assessment of the current  state of play of direct exchange markets 
between the yen and renminbi establis hed on 1 June 2012 as mentioned above? 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 57 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  With regard to the volume of direct exchange between the yen and the renminbi, 
180 million dollars per day was traded in Octobe r 2012 in the Tokyo fore ign exchange market, 
according to “Results of Turnover Survey of Tok yo Foreign Exchange Market” released by the 
Tokyo Foreign Exchange Market Committee, and a total of 759.3 billion renminbi was traded 
from October to December 2012 in the Shanghai foreign exchange market, according to the 
China Monetary Policy Report released by the People’s Bank of China.  
 Page 15 (Para 48) 
On 16 December 2011, the Japanese government formulated a Program for Promoting Japan as 
an Asian Business Centre and Direct Invest ment into Japan, which summarized the policy 
measures concerning the creation of an attractive, world-class business and living environment to boost the competitiveness of Japan as a busin ess location by leveraging its business location 
environment and to promote direct investment into Japan, foremost by building Japan into an business centre in Asia.  
Question 17 
 
It is often alleged that there are voluntary r estrictions which are controlled by business 
associations but not expressly stipulated in Japan ese law and regulations, and, which in effect 
act as investment barriers.  Among others, restrictive business practices in the distribution 
sector are reported as obstacles for foreign comp anies to enter into the Japanese market.  
 In this regard, could Japan indicate whether th e Japanese Government has any plan to  improve 
business environment for foreign companies?  
RESPONSE:  The Government has implemented a variety of policies to promote inward FDI. 
Please refer to the “Program for Promoting Jap an as an Asian Business Center and Direct 
Investment into Japan” (below) for the government initiatives. 
http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program.pdf  
 
III. Trade and Development 
 Page 17 (Para 61) 
(……) On 1 April 2011, Japan extended the e ffective period of the GSP scheme to 31 March 
2021. Japan abolished all ceiling-based schemes fo r certain industrial products and revised the 
criteria for application of competitiveness-fo cused, product-by-exclusion measures. The 
revision was made to make the criteria more objective and transparent and to allow less 
competitive developing countries to benefit more from the GSP scheme.  Question 18 
 Given that the value of imports is one of the cr iteria for products/country exclusion, could Japan 
provide its view on whether currency depreciati on will have an effect on the GSP scheme such 
as an increase of products subject to exclusion?  RESPONSE:  Based on its trade statics that count the import amount in yen, Japan implements 
the measure that excludes items imported from GSP beneficiaries from application of the GSP 
scheme on a country/item basis in an objective manner, regardless of the economic conditions. 
 IV. Japan’s Domestic Policies 
 Page 21(Para 82) 
With the development of digitization and networ king, Japan amended its Copyright Act in 2012. 
The following are the major amendments: WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 58 
 
 
 -In order to facilitate exploitation of copyrigh ted works, provisions relating to limitations on 
copyright including so-called “inc idental use” have been amended. 
 - Aiming at more appropriate protection of co pyright, provisions relating to technological 
protection measures have been amended.  
 Question 19 
 According to the report by the Japanese Governme nt, it amended the provisions relating to the 
technological protection measures (TPMs) in the Copyright Law (as amended by Law No.43, of 
June 27, 2012). It is understood that the scope  of protection has expanded to the access control 
TPMs, and subject matter of protected technologies is stipulated in a very specific manner. The following are questions relating to the amended provisions of TPMs. 
 (1) According to the Japanese Copyright Law, it see ms that protection is granted against the 
circumvention of encryption technologies only when the encryption is applied in order to 
prevent a reproduction of works. However, most encryption technologies are being applied to prevent playback. Please indicate whet her the Japanese Copyright Law protects the 
encryption technologies which allow reproduction but not playback. (For example, in the case of e-books or digital forms of music, TPMs are applied to limit the number of 
playbacks or the use of copy righted works only in the certa in registered equipment.) 
 
(2) It seems that the specific stipulation of subj ect matter of protected technology would be a 
restriction to keep up with the rapid developmen t of technology. Is there any specific reason 
for Japan to stipulate provisions on TPMs in this way?  
 
RESPONSE:  (1) In the amendments of the Copyright Act in 2012, cryptographic technologies 
(technologies that are used for DVD and other fo rmats) became covered in the definition of 
technological protection measures.  Protection technologies which only have an access control function which limits playback are not incl uded in the scope of technological protection 
measures. Regarding your question (In the case of TPMs used in e-books or digital forms of 
music), it is difficult to answer in general terms because there are various protection 
technologies in the market. However, if protection technologies only have an access control function and do not have a copy control func tion at all, the protection measures are not 
considered TPMs  
(2) Before the amendments of the Copyright Act in 2012, it was pointed out that it was hard to 
ensure the effectiveness of copyright and re lated rights because cryptographic technologies 
(technologies that are used for DVD and other form ats) were not covered in the definition of 
technological protection measures and, because the co pyright holders could not take an effective 
action regarding the illegal exploitation of copyri ghted works on the Internet. The amendments 
of the Copyright Act in 2012 respond to these problems.  
Question 20 
 
According to Article 2 (ix quinquies ), Article 92 bis and Article 96 bis of the Japanese Copyright 
Law, performers and producers of phonograms sha ll have the exclusive right to make their 
performances and phonograms transmittable. Pl ease indicate whether the Right of Making 
Transmittable under the Japanese Copyright Law is the same concept as the Right of Making Available (Article 10 and Article 14) under the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty 
(WPPT).    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 59 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  The right of making transmittable stipulat ed in Article 92 bis and Article 96 bis 
of the Copyright Act has the same concept as the Right of Making Available (Article 10 and Article 14) under the WPPT.  
 
Page 23 (Para 93) 
The JFTC has adopted a proactive policy on fili ng criminal complaints to seek penalties for 
violations of the AMA. In June 2012, the JFTC filed complaints in one case. 
 Question 21 
 Could Japan provide any details of the case noted in paragraph 93?  
 RESPONSE:  The Japan Fair Trade Commission, having investigated a price-fixing cartel case 
concerning industrial machinery bearings and automotive bearings, found a criminal violation of the Antimonopoly Act (the “AMA”) and file d a criminal charge with the Public 
Prosecutor-General against three companies, a nd seven individuals in the three companies 
accused who were engaged in sales of bearings, in  accordance with Article 74 (1) of the AMA. 
The details are described in the link below:    (Reference) 
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleas es/archives/individual-000486.html  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 60 
 
 
 10. CHINA 
WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM CHINA 
PART I: QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SECRETARIAT REPORT 
SUMMARY 
Page vii (Para 4) 
The supplementary budgets were compleme nted by accommodative monetary policy, 
including a move towards "inflation targeting", adopted against the backdrop of a persistent 
deflationary environment in Japan.  In additi on, the yen continued to appreciate against all 
major currencies.  If sustained, this will tend to further reduce the international 
competitiveness of Japan's exporters, unless thei r productivity can be substantially improved. 
 
Questions: 
 
Earlier this year, the Japanese cabinet has approved a stimulus package worth 20.2 trillion 
yen (about 224 billion U.S. dollars) submitte d by the Economy Recovery Department of 
Japan, which includes government investment  on the “companies for special purpose” to 
support the application of new technology and instrument in the company, taxation reduction 
to encourage more investment and R&D and to  support foreign market exploration. Please 
indicate the details of the Japanese government at all levels implementing the stimulus and 
supporting measures and creating more opportuniti es for domestic manufactures to stand out 
in the international market.  RESPONSE:  On January 2013, Japan implemented the measure encouraging business 
investments for increasing productivity, enhancement of the R&D promotion tax system, and 
other measures, as emergency economic meas ures for the revitalization of the Japanese 
economy  
Page vii (Para 5) 
These more expansionary macroeconomic polic ies have supported Japan's economy.  A 
rebound in GDP growth is expected in 2012, main ly due to constructi on spending, consumer 
spending, and inventory building in the wake of supply chain disruptions.  However, these 
policies do not address Japan's long-standing struct ural problems (including the rapid aging of 
its population), which have resulted in Japan's sluggish growth during the past decade or so. 
These problems can be addressed more effectivel y by far-reaching structural reforms, of 
which trade liberalization (and the resulting stim ulus to competition) is an integral part. 
 
Questions: 
 
1) Will Japan take relevant measures to  further liberalize its trade?  
2) If so, please indicate the specific measures that are involved. 
 
RESPONSE: Promotion of trade liberalization is pillar of Japan’s trade policy.Together with 
continuing efforts to advance the ongoing negotia tions of the WTO, Japan will also actively 
engage in EPA/FTA negotiations with selected countries of strategic importance to Japan. At 
the same time, the government will adva nce regulatory reform. The Council for the 
Promotion of Regulatory Reform set up this year by the Abe cabinet will investigate and 
deliberate on regulatory reform in order to r ealize bold reforms in pursuit of setting-up an 
internationally attractive economic environment.  
 
Page viii (Para 18) 
With regard to agriculture, the Government has continued to move away from price support 
toward income support.  However, the chang es have been relatively minor and the sector 
continues to receive substantia l government support involving, inter alia,  a relatively higher 
average applied MFN tariff rate compared with  other sectors, tariff quotas, income support,   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 61 
 
 
 and, in some subsectors, production controls. 
 
Questions: 
 
1) Please indicate the effect of the subsidi es implemented by the Japanese government on 
the agriculture. 
 
RESPONSE:  As an example, relating to structural reforms, policy measures including 
subsidies have contributed to: 
  － increase in the size of farm management (fro m1995 to 2011, the average crop farm size 
increased 1.3-fold, dairy farm size1.6 -fold, and hog farm size three-fold) 
  － consolidation of farmland (the share of farmland cultivated by persons principally 
engaged in farming increased from 28% in 2000 to 49% in 2010) 
 
2)  Please indicate how the Japanese government ch ooses the target of its subsidies and how 
to comply the subsidies with the WTO rules.  
 
RESPONSE: The government’s support is mainly ta rgeted to the land-intensive sector, 
whose size of management is very small compared  with other countries (average size of farm 
managements in the crop sector are Japan:  2ha, U.S.: 170ha, Australia: 2970ha). All the 
measures are implemented in accord ance with the WTO Agreements 
 I. ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 
Page 2 (Para 2) 
The Japanese economy has rebounded since then and r eal GDP growth is expected to be 2.4% 
in 2012.6  Recent growth has not been driven by  exports, but has come on the back of 
reconstruction spending, c onsumer spending (helped by government subsidies for 
environmentally friendly automobiles), and inve ntory building in the wake of supply chain 
disruptions.  However, the recovery is fra gile, with the Japanese economy being susceptible 
to shocks in the global economic environment esp ecially in key trading partners such as the 
EU and China. 
 
Page 5 (Para 2) 
In 2011, the share of exports of goods and services in GDP was 15.9% (15.8% in 2010), 
while the share of imports was 16.6% (14% in 2010).7  These shares have increased since 
2009, with imports rising faster (mainly due to hi gher fuel imports).  Japan continues to be 
the world's fourth largest exporter (counting the European Union as one) and importer of 
goods.  The deficit in services trade has increased since 2009.  This is due mainly to higher 
travel and transport payments, as more Japanese travelled abroad because of the stronger yen. 
The deficit was US$22.3 billion in 2011 (0.4% of GDP).  Trade in services as a proportion 
of GDP has remained slightly over 5% since 2009.  Questions: 
1） Will Japan launch more policies to promote exports? 
RESPONSE:  Japan expects that enhancement of the multilateral trading system under the 
WTO and promotion of EPAs as means of complementing the MTS contribute to the expansion of export from Japan. 
 
2） Please indicate the impacts on Japan when its  annual trade balance first moved into 
deficit since 1980. 
                                                 
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 62 
 
 
  
RESPONSE: Japanese trade deficit in 2011 was caused mainly by the following factors: 
1. The Import Price Index rose mainly due to the increase of petroleum prices. 2. The volume of LNG imports increased be cause of the decline of the operational 
availability of nuclear power plants. 
3. The volume of exports decreased due to deceleration of the world economy. We do not consider that the trade defic it in itself will affect the Japanese economy 
immediately. In any case, attention should c ontinuously be paid to the trade balance. 
 Page 3 (Para 5) 
Other than rebuilding the physical infrastructur e, the focus of the Government's rebuilding 
strategy is on job creation.  In this respect, the authorities have identified the creation of new 
innovative industries through the utilization of "reconstruction special zones" and private 
sector funds.  Industries targeted include:  environmentally friendly industries, life sciences, science and technology, and info rmation and communications sectors.  The 
authorities are also focusing on small and medium  enterprises (SMEs) as an engine of growth 
and revitalization.  In this regard, the Govern ment made sure that financing lines remained 
open after the disaster and is also considering making start-up capital more easily available. In order to realize the above, the Governme nt has also consented to the Program for 
Promoting Japan as an Asian Business Center and Direct Investment into Japan (Chapter II). 
In the wake of the nuclear disaster, the Government is also in the process of reviewing its 
energy strategy and mix.  This is also  seen as an avenue for reconstruction and 
revitalization.  In September 2012, the author ities issued the Innovative Strategy for Energy 
and the Environment.  These policies form the basis of Japan's energy strategy, which is 
governed by three underlying principles:  realization of a society not dependent on nuclear 
power;  realization of a green energy revolution;  and stable supply of energy. 
 
Questions: 
1） Please elaborate on the current development of the new innovative industries that 
mentioned above. And please indicate their impacts on the economic recovery and 
long-term economic development of Japan. 
 
RESPONSE: Please see the following link. This initiative was adopted under the past 
administration. 
http://www.npu.go.jp/policy/ pdf/20120731/20 120731_en.pdf  
 
2） Does Japan regard these industries as the p illar industry? And are there any specific 
supporting measures for these industries?  
 RESPONSE: These industries are the pillars for sustained economic growth. The 
Government takes some specific supporting measures regarding these industries. For example, the Government thoroughly promotes  and supports corporate revival and business 
improvement by supporting organizations. Furt hermore, the Government provides support to 
about 10000 SMEs and Small/Micro Enterprises wh ich create prototype products or consider 
capital investments. As a means of improving th e all-Japan support system for the creation of 
innovative drugs and medical devices, the Gove rnment will establish a network of academia, 
industries and institutions for drug discovery research. 
 
Page 2 (Para 4) 
…the fiscal deficit in 2011 was in excess of 10% of GDP, while gross government debt 
reached nearly 230% of GDP.  The fiscal deficit is expected to widen slightly in 2012 on account of continued reconstruction spending. 
 
Page 3 (Para 6)   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 63 
 
 
 …The BOJ announced in February 2012 that it would continue with a zero interest rate 
policy and implement an asset purchase program me until it judges that an annual inflation 
rate of 1% is "in sight”…  
 
Questions: 
1) Recently, BOJ has raised the target inflati on rate from 1% to 2% and announced the asset 
acquisition plan of a larger scale. We suggest the relevant information in the Report could be updated. The easy monetary policy impl emented by Japan may end deflation and 
stimulate devaluation of YEN and further raise yields on government debts. Whether this, 
plus current large-amount debts, difficulti es in financing and pressure on interest 
payment, will threaten Japan's fiscal sust ainability? In addition, whether any other 
country will follow Japan's practice to devalue its own currency with a view to improving 
its competitiveness so that the whole world will be lost in a contest of currency devaluation and the global economy will be facing risks? 
 
RESPONSE: The aim of the monetary policy conducted by the Bank of Japan is to 
overcome deflation as early as possible and achie ve sustainable economic growth with price 
stability.  In implementing its monetary polic y objective, the Bank of Japan does not and 
will not aim to weaken the yen.  Japan has no in tention to promote devaluation of yen at all. 
As for fiscal policy, in general terms, economic growth and price increases lead to rising 
long-term interest rates. Japan has to note th at this situation will make interest payment 
increase.  So, Japan will implement various measures stea dily in order to achieve Japan's economic 
regeneration and mid-to-long-term sustainab ility of the fiscal structure simultaneously. 
 
For example, Japan will implement“the Compre hensive Reform of Social Security and 
Tax”which includes gradually raising the consumption tax rate, while reviewing 
expenditures.  2) Recently, the Japanese government has launche d the new supplementary budget and BOJ 
has also announced the new quantitative easing policy. How will this affect Japan's 
government debts which are always on the ri se? Whether a government debt crisis will 
break out? 
 
RESPONSE: In order to prevent further deteriorati on of the economy, Japan formulated the 
supplementary budget draft in January 2013. 
 On the other hand, as for the FY2013 initial budget draft, in the light of fiscal consolidation targets, Japan formulated a prioritized  budget from the previous fiscal year. 
 Japan will implement “the Comprehensive Refo rm of Social Security and Tax” which 
includes gradually raising the consumption tax ra te, while reviewing expenditures, in order to 
achieve mid-to-long-term sustainability of the fiscal structure.  Regarding the monetary policy, in implementi ng its monetary policy objective, the Bank of 
Japan has no intention to be engage d in debt monetization at all.  
 
（Reference 1 ）the fiscal stimulus package's effect on  the long-term debt outstanding of 
central government 
When Japan implements “Emergency Economic  Measures for The Revitalization of the 
Japanese Economy”, additional JGB will be issued. 
On the other hand, Japan will also implem ent Reconstruction Bonds redemption etc. 
As the result of it, long-term debt outstandi ng of the central government will only slightly WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 64 
 
 
 increase from the forecast made when formulating the FY 2012 initial budget. 
（Reference 2 ）Japanese Fiscal Consolidation Target 
Primary balance of central and local governments 
: By FY2015, halve deficit ratio to GDP from that of FY2010 and by FY2020, achieve 
surplus  
Page 3 (Para 5) 
…In this regard, the Government made sure that financing lines remained open after the 
disaster and is also considering making start-up capital more easily available….   Questions: 
How the sponsorship to the SMEs and start-ups may be guaranteed? 
 
RESPONSE:  After the Great East Japan Earthquake, the Government of Japan extended the 
“Act concerning temporary Measures to Fac ilitate Financing for SMEs” until March 2013. 
The Act includes: (a) Responsibilities of Financial Institutions -When requested by a SME or a residential mortgage borrower to ease the debt burden, 
financial institutions shall endeavor to revise the loan terms, etc. (b) Internal control of Financial Institutions 
Financial Institutions shall: 
-Develop internal systems for fulfilling the a bove responsibilities of financial institutions 
-Disclose information on implementation of  the responsibilities and the development of 
internal systems (c) Administrative Measures 
-Financial institutions shall report the informa tion on their implementation to the supervising 
authority -The authority will publish the summary of  the reports from financial institutions 
 In addition, in order to address the “double-debt  problem*” faced by co mpanies struck by the 
quake, the Industrial Reconstr uction Organization and Corporation for Revitalization 
Earthquake Affected Business have been estab lished. These organizations aim to support 
reconstruction of business through purchase of m onetary claims from financial institutions 
and thereby relax the debt burden of the affected companies.  (*) the problem for companies struck by th e quake of their existing debts preventing 
themfrom applying for new loans 
 Related agencies (Reconstruction Agency, Small and Medium Enterprise Agency and Financial Services Agency), in a closely coordi nated manner, will promote this policy so that 
utilization of these organizations will help redu ce the burden of affected companies and give 
them access to new loans. 
 
Page 3 (Para 7) 
…It would appear that the appreciation in th e exchange rate has eroded the international 
competitiveness of Japanese exports to some exte nt, as Japan recorded a trade deficit in 2011, 
the first time in three decades.  Questions: 
1) It is said in the report that “[i]t would appear  that the appreciation in the exchange rate 
has eroded the international competitiveness of  Japanese exports to some extent”, but 
YEN has always been in the process of devaluation since September 2012 from 78 
(against US dollar, similarly hereinafter) at  the end of September to approximately 86. 
Currently, the devaluation has not stopped. Wh at is the reason behind the recent trend and   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 65 
 
 
 the devaluation of YEN? Whether it is caused  by the continuous easy monetary policy 
adopted by BOJ? 
 
RESPONSE: Recent trends of the yen are market-determined movements, which basically 
reflect changes in fundamental economic and fi nancial conditions. There are three points to 
be stressed. First, policy actions in Europe have  eased the risk status. Second, Japan’s trade 
balance has fallen into a continuous state of deficit following the earthquake of March 2011 
resulting in a record high deficit in 2012. Third, there are signs of recovery in the U.S. economy. 
 
The aim of the monetary policy conducted by th e Bank of Japan is to overcome deflation as 
early as possible and achieve sustainable economic growth with price stability.  In implementing its monetary policy objectives, the Bank of Japan does not  aim to weaken the yen.  
2) The Japanese government has intervened the market fo r several times when YEN 
appreciated while depreciation of YEN will pl ace the trading partners in disadvantageous 
positions. Whether the government has fully ta ken such spillover effects of depreciation 
in the exchange rate into account? What are the judgement standards on the rationality of 
market intervention? 
 
RESPONSE: The interventions were conducted to counter excessive and disorderly 
movements in the market, based on the agreem ents widely shared among the international 
community, including the agreement of the G20 Summit which states that “we reiterate that 
excess volatility of financial flows and disorderly  movements in exchange  rates have adverse 
implications for economic and financial stability”. 
 3) How will the imports and exports of Japan and its trading partners be affected by 
depreciation of YEN? 
 RESPONSE: The current depreciation of the yen is a market-determined movement. (It is 
difficult to generalize the effects.) 
4) Japan recorded a trade deficit in 2011, the first time in 31 years. Will this cause current 
account deficit in the future? How will this affect the Japanese economy? 
 
RESPONSE: Japanese trade deficit in 2011 was caused mainly by the following factors: 
1. The Import Price Index rose mainly due to the increase of petroleum prices. 
2. The volume of LNG imports increased because of the decline of the operational 
availability of nuclear power plants. 
3. The volume of exports decreased due to deceleration of the world economy. 
 We think that items 1. and 3. are not permanen t. On the other hand, attention should be paid 
to the fact that the volume of fuel imports w ill be largely depend on future energy policies. 
In 2012, though the trade deficit was about 5.8 trillion yen, the income balance was about 14.3 trillion yen and the current account balance was about 4.7 trillion yen.  
Page 4 (Para 9) 
The Government's fiscal strategy is to put th e public-debt-to-GDP ratio on a declining trend. 
To achieve this, the authorities aim to halve the primary deficit to GDP ratio by FY2015 and 
realize a primary surplus by FY2020.  In this regard, the Diet has approved a bill that would 
increase the consumption tax rate from the curre nt 5% to 8% in April 2014 and to 10% in 
October 2015.  However, according to IMF estimat es, this, together with a planned cut in 
expenditure, would only reduce the primary deficit to 5% of GDP by 2020, while a fiscal 
adjustment of 10% of GDP over the next decad e is necessary to put the public-debt-to-GDP WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 66 
 
 
 ratio firmly on a downward path. 
Questions: 
How does the Japanese government  appraise Japan's risks in public debts? What measures 
will be adopted in future to effectively reduce deficit?  
RESPONSE: Japan's fiscal situation is very severe; for example, the long-term debt 
outstanding ratio to GDP of central and local  governments will reach 200% at the end of 
FY2013. If the interest rate of Japanese Gove rnment Bonds runs up sharply, government 
interest payments will significantly increase.  
 
In accordance with the fiscal consolidation goal of attaining a primary balance, the 
government of Japan will limit the issuance of government bonds to the extent possible in the 
coming fiscal year's budget and continue the Comprehensive Social Security and Tax Reform. Also, the Council on Economic and Fisc al Policy will examine the steps toward 
concomitant realization of Japan's economic re generation and mid-to-long-term sustainability 
of the fiscal structure. 
 
Page 4 (Para 11) 
In addition to the Program for Promoting Jap an as an Asian Business Center and Direct 
Investment into Japan, the authorities have a nnounced a cut in the corporation tax rate in 
April 2012, to improve incentives to invest (Chapter III(3)).  However, strict and 
complicated domestic sector regulations and the limited availability of risk capital continue to be cited as serious impediments to investment. 
 
Questions: 
1） Is there any other plan to improve the invest ment environment in addition to the Program 
for Promoting Japan as an Asian Business Cent er and Direct Investment into Japan as 
well as a cut in the corporation tax rate? 
 
RESPONSE: The "Program for Promoting Japan as an Asian Business Center and Direct 
Invest into Japan" is a summary of the variety of  policies of the Government of Japan to give 
incentives to inward FDI. The Program co mprehends all major initiatives aiming at 
improving the investment environment.  
2） Is there any plan to simplify the complicat ed domestic sector regulations? Please explain 
in detail. 
 
RESPONSE: The Government of Japan has implemented a variety of policies to give 
incentives to inward FDI, including those dea ling with the issues China points out. Please 
refer to the "Program for Promoting Japan as an Asian Business Center and Direct Invest into 
Japan" (below) for the initiatives by the Government of Japan. 
http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program.pdf 
 
Page 8 (Para 18)  
Japan's inward FDI remains substantially lowe r than outward FDI, and low compared with 
other developed economies.  After recording inflows between 2007 and 2009, inward FDI 
showed outflows of US$1.4 billion  in 2010 and US$1.8 billion in 2011.  On the other hand, 
Japan's outward FDI more than doubled in 2011, to US$116 billion, (from US$57 billion in 
2010), presumably due to an appreciating yen and low returns in the domestic economy. 
The stock of inward FDI has remained static at approximately 3.9% of GDP since 2009, while the stock of outward FDI rose to 16.0% of GDP in 2011, from 14.5% of GDP in 2009. 
 
    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 67 
 
 
  
Questions: 
Is there any plan to materially promote in ward FDI? E.g. further simplifying approval 
procedures, further opening up  legal, medical, financial and other service sectors and 
reducing restrictions on M&A by foreigners. 
 
RESPONSE: The Government of Japan aims proactively at attracting businesses from 
abroad by boosting the competitiveness of Japan as a business location and creating a 
world-class investment environment. This w ill be achieved by providing more incentives 
such as subsidies and preferential tax treatment . Specific tools include location subsidies for 
both domestic and foreign businesses alike based  on the non-discriminatory principle and 
corporate tax breaks for global businesses.  In particular, the Government of Japan aims at attracting investment from businesses in Japan 
and abroad by taking advantage of the co mprehensive special zone system (involving 
International Strategic Comprehensive Special  Zones and Local Vitalization Comprehensive 
Special Zones) and the“Future City” and the Recovery Special Zone System. Through these means, the central government will be strategica lly aligned with local governments to create 
jobs in these communities.  
The Government of Japan also aims to make the flow of human and material resources more 
efficient and expedient by such means as cu ltivating global human resources, establishing 
hubs for state-of-the-art research and education,  and building social capital including airports 
and seaports for the overall goal of increasing th e flow of people, goods and money. Another 
objective is to review regulations that po se obstacles to FDI in Japan. Other objectives 
include improving the transparency of related administrative procedures and the convenience 
of accessing information and providing Eng lish translations of such procedures. 
 In addition, the Government of Japan aims at  creating a better living environment with focus 
on education, health care and other fundamental  services and enhancing the convenience for 
foreign nationals with a more efficient environment for accepting them. 
 
And, further the Government of Japan also aims at clearly indicating Japan’s position as a country that welcomes direct investment into the country, with the Government demonstrating leadership in conducting public relations showing the attractiveness of Japan 
as a place to locate a business. Other objectives include eliminating reputational damages, 
creating a strong impression of safety and security, and striving for an “Open Reconstruction” 
from the Great East Japan Earthquake.  II. TRADE POLICY REGIME:  FRAMEWORK AND OBJECTIVES  
Page 10 (Para 3) 
Currently Japan has 12 bilateral trade agreemen ts and one regional ag reement (with ASEAN). 
Japan is currently negotiating bilateral FTAs (EPAs) with the Gulf Cooperation Council 
(Bahrain, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Om an, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates), 
Australia, and Mongolia.  Since June 2008, Japan has been holding working-level consultations to "consider and create a fa vourable environment for the resumption of 
negotiations" with the Republic of Korea.  Japan also participates in the Asia-Pacific 
Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum and in other regional trade fora, such as the 
Asia-Europe meeting (ASEM), the ASEAN+3, and the East Asian Summit.  Japan officially 
encourages foreign direct investment (FDI).  However, in recent years, inward FDI into 
Japan has remained low (Chapter I). 
 
Questions: 
Inward FDI keeps low although Japan has always been encouraging inward investment. What WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 68 
 
 
 is the fundamental reason? How much do syst em barriers contribute to the low FDI? 
RESPONSE: As China points out, Japan has continuous ly been encouraging inward FDI. As 
regard to the issues China mentions, the Govern ment of Japan has implemented a variety of 
policies to give incentives to inward FDI. Tho se policies are summarized as the "Program for 
Promoting Japan as an Asian Business Center and Direct Invest into Japan".  Please refer to 
the website below for the contents of the Program: http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program.pdf 
 The follow-up of the Program was conducted in June 2012. 
http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program-followup.pdf  
 
In addition, in order to show Japan’s willi ngness to welcome FDI into Japan, the Government 
of Japan is working on proactive public rela tions through its diplomatic missions overseas 
and Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO)’s overseas offices. 
 
Page 13 (Para 7) 
Promoting transparency remains one of the G overnment's policy priorities.  All laws and 
regulations are published in the Government Gazette  and are made available on the internet. 
In coordination with the Administrative Project Review Section of the Cabinet Office, the Government makes available and clarifies th e mission of each policy and undertakes policy 
evaluations.  It has also promoted the rel ease of information on polic y evaluations to the 
public, including on special taxation measures.  On the other hand, the lack of cost-benefit 
analyses of policies, particularly of existing policies, makes it difficult for consumers to 
assess their effectiveness and effectively underm ines the Government's intention to promote 
transparency.  Questions: 
What measures will be adopted to further promot e transparency of polic ies? E.g. encouraging 
the consultation institutions serving govern mental decision-makers to establish the 
communication channels with stakeholders  and extending public comment period. 
 
RESPONSE:  The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) was established to ensure a 
guarantee of fairness and progress towards tran sparency in administrative operations by 
providing common rules concerning procedures for dealing with issues, administrative 
guidance and notifications, and procedures for establishing "Administrative Orders”, etc.. 
Currently, movements on revision of the APA are not taking place. 
 
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
11.MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS (i) Customs clearance procedures and valuation 
Page 22 (Para 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 permission system upon arrival"), down 
from 62.4 hours for sea cargo and 16 hours for air cargo at the time of the last review. 
 
Questions: 
Please indicate whether the immediate import permission system is the same as the automatic import licensing based on the need of trade statistics monitoring, or as the management system that directly releases the low-risk goods? Does Jap an has other systems to manage and monitor 
the custom clearance and what is the specifi c custom clearance process of the import and 
export of goods in Japan?   
RESPONSE: The “immediate import permission system” is a system utilized by importers   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 69 
 
 
 who are willing to acquire impor t permission upon arrival of the cargo without bringing them 
into the hozei  area., as explained in the Note 3 for paragr aph 3 of the Report. It is not same as 
the measures raised in the question.  
For information on specific Customs clearance process of the import and export of goods, 
please refer to the pages on the Customs Website below. Summary of Customs procedures on import: http://www.customs.go.jp/english/summary/import.htm  
Summary of Customs procedures on export: 
http://www.customs.go.jp/english/summary/export.htm  
 
Page 22 (Para 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 ha ve goods released before filing the customs duty 
declaration.  Import declarations may be filed in advance of cargo arrivals.  In addition, 
importers are eligible for 
bonded transportation without obtai ning individual permission. 
Currently, manufacturers, warehouse operators, cu stoms brokers, and logistics operators are 
eligible to become AEOs.  Japan has mutu al recognition arrangements on AEO programmes 
with Canada, the European Union, the Republic of Korea, New Zealand, Singapore, and the 
United States, under which Japan Customs takes in to account the status of the members of the 
other AEO programme when conduc ting its own risk assessment. 
 
Questions: 
Please indicate how to recognize the foreign importer that is under the AEO program from the 
country in the mutual recognition arrangement s on AEO programmes with Japan. What kind of 
factors of importers from the members of the other AEO programme will be taken into account when conducting its own risk assessment, and wh at facilitative measures will be taken to 
importers under AEO program?  
 
RESPONSE: Japan Customs recognizes foreign authorized importer that are under the AEO 
program of MRA partner countries by cross-re ferencing the information on AEOs provided by 
the partner countries and the declaration documen ts submitted by the exporters which include 
the information on foreign importers. 
 As for the factors of foreign importers to be  taken into account in risk assessment, such 
information cannot be disclosed. 
Japan Customs offers lower ri sk scores for these importers. 
 
Questions: 
1) How to become AEOs? 
 
RESPONSE: To become AEOs, operators must meet certain criteria such as no law violation 
for certain period, adopting bylaws to establis h institutional arrangement to secure mainly 
cargo/conveyance security, internal audit, trad e partner security and the capacity to operate 
appropriately and with certainty.  
If an AEO applicant satisfies all standards, DG of the Japan Customs au thorizes the applicant 
as an AEO.  For detail of Japanese AEO program, please refer to the following website. http://www.customs.go.jp/english/aeo/pamphlet.pdf  
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 70 
 
 
  
2) When evaluating import risks of the products from a member under the mutual recognition 
arrangement, how will Japan c onsider the conditions of the member? What are the 
standards? 
 
RESPONSE: Details of the risk assessment cannot be provided. 
 
Page 22 (Para 5) 
All importers must file a customs declaration; this may now be done before goods are brought 
into the hozei  (bonded) area.  Prior to October 2011, the 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 transaction value of the imported goods). 
 
Questions: 
Please indicate whether the  hozei  (bonded) area refers to the customs supervision area; if not, 
do all the import goods have to enter the hozei  area? What is the “other designated place” 
referring to in the sentence that “the declarati on had to be filed after the goods had been taken 
into a hozei  area or other designated place.”?  
 
RESPONSE: The hozei  (bonded) area refers to the area under the supervision of the Customs. 
 
“Other designated place” is the permitted place where the foreign goods, which the Director 
General of the Customs considers to be difficu lt or extremely inappropriate to keep in the hozei 
area, are stored for specific period.  
※Japan would like to correct the word “importers ” to “exporters” in the sentence of paragraph 
5 of the Report that reads: “All importers must file a customs declaration.” (Importers cannot 
file a customs declaration before goods are brought to the hozei area even now.) 
 
Page 22 (Para 6) 
Importers may pay the assessed customs duty through the multi-payment network system. 
The network connects teller institutions (govern ment authorities) with financial institutions. 
The Government does not charge for use of th e system; however, the financial institutions 
involved may collect fees.  At the request of importers and other concerned parties, written advance rulings are published on the custom s website; these rulings are not binding. 
Questions: 
1） What is the range of the advance rulings in Japan? Is the valuation advance ruling 
included? If it is included, please indicate how to make the advance ruling in Japan when 
the transaction price of import goods is not accepted by the customs? 
 
RESPONSE:  
-Japan Customs provides advance rulings on Ta riff classification, Customs valuation and the 
Rules of origin. -When the customs value of imported goods cannot be determined under the Transaction 
Value method (Article 1 of the WTO Valuation Agreement), Japan Customs issues an advance 
ruling on which of the alternative methods (Artic le 2 to 7 of the WTO Valuation Agreement) 
would be applied to the goods.  
 
2） Will an importer be idetified to violate the monitoring regulation of the Japanese Customs 
if it fails to implement the advance rulings during the customs clearance? If an importer 
provides the information at variance with th e reality during the application of avdance 
rulings, how will the Japanese Customs deal with it? And should the importer assume 
relevant legal responsibilities?   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 71 
 
 
  
 
RESPONSE: 
-Importers can choose whether or not to use the issued advance ruling in the actual import 
declaration. Not using the advance ruling in an import declaration does not in itself constitute a 
violation of laws and regulations.  - If Japan Customs discovers that the advan ce ruling was issued based on erroneous facts 
provided by the applicant, Customs will notify th e applicant in writing that the advance ruling 
will be revoked and become invalid. 
 - When an importer received an advance ruling issued based on erroneous facts, and the 
amount of duty to be paid using the advance ruling is found to be deficient, the amount of duty for the import declaration would be revised by Japan Customs, and importers would assume legal responsibilities for the deficient, such as payment of additional duty.  Page 23 (Para 7) 
Since February 2010, the electronic applicati on formalities among various agencies have been 
unified through the completion of the common portal for next generation single window. Currently, eight customs offices are open round the cl ock (seven at the time of the last review). 
 
Questions: 
Please update the development of establishing the next generation signle window and indicate 
whether the format of the current fo rm has been completely unified. 
 
RESPONSE: The next generation single window has been  completed by the completion of the 
common portal in February 2010. As the next action, the common portal and other systems which have not been integrated yet will be integrated into NACCS (Nippon Automated Cargo 
and Port Consolidated System) in October 2013.  
Page 23 (Para 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 decision by the Director-General 
of Customs.  A law suit may be filed against the Minister's decision within six months of the decision.  In 2011, there were 31 complaints (51 in 2010), and 5 appeals (3 in 2010); 
additionally, two law suits were filed (none in 2010). 
 
Questions: 
Can an administrative lawsuit be directly br ought to the court against Customs’decision, 
except for comlpaints being made to the Direct or-General of Customs within two months of 
the decision? And can an administrative lawsuit be brought to the court against the decision of 
the Director-General of Customs? 
 RESPONSE: A. An administrative lawsuit can be directly brought to the court against 
Customs dispositions, except for: (i) a determination or collection of cu stoms duty or disposition on duty unpaid;  
(ii) a notification that the goods are deemed obscene books, paintings, pictures, carvings, etc.; 
or (iii) a notification that the goods are deemed child pornography. Custom’s decision and the decision of the Director-General of Customs are same.  
 
Page 25 (Para 10) 
The non- ad valorem  rates of duty (6.6% of all tariff lines) apply mainly to fats and oils, WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 72 
 
 
 footwear, prepared foods, live animals and anim al products, textiles and clothing, vegetables, 
and mineral products (Chart III.1).  The authorities provided ad valorem  equivalents for 478 
lines; consequently, the tariff anal ysis is based on 99.2% of the 9,168 tariff lines.  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 . 
 
Page 28 (Para 13) 
...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.  
Questions: 
According to the Report by the Secretariat, non- ad valorem rates conceal  tariff peaks. During 
the period under review, the non-ad valorem rates of Japan account for 6.6% of the total tariff 
lines, the same as that in the 10th Trade Policy Review on Japan in 2011. Whether the Japanese 
government has ever changed non-ad valorem ra tes to ad valorem rates during the period 
between the two Reviews? If yes, please specify in  detail; if no, whether there is any explicit 
plan to reduce the proportion of non-ad valorem rates in future? 
 
RESPONSE: Japan has not changed non-ad valorem ra tes to ad valorem rates since 2011. 
Japan has applied an appropriate type of tariff for each product in accordance with the 
product's properties. As such, Japan has at present no plan to reduce the proportion of non-ad valorem rates.  Page 31 (Para 24) 
The METI is responsible for administering the import quota system.  Eligible importers are issued with an import quota allocation certifi cate.  The method for allocating quotas, which 
tends to be complex and intricate, is specified in METI notices.  Quota allocations are decided on an annual basis.  Fish-related quot as 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). 
Applicants for quota allocations must meet various criteria.  Some quotas are allocated on a first-come first-served basis.  When the amount applied for exceeds remaining unallocated 
quota, quotas are allocated by lottery. 
 
Questions:  
1) The information on the quota allocation method published by METI as indicated in the 
notes of the Report by the Secretariat is in Jap anese. Whether Japan plans to translate this 
into WTO working languages? How does the translation go? 
2) The Japanese translation plan is  in Japanese. Is there any English version? If no, whether 
and when Japan plans to issu e such an English version? 
 
RESPONSE: The announcements on quota allocations are to explain to Japanese importers 
the standards and procedures to retrieve import quotas. Therefore, METI publishes those 
announcements in Japanese and has no plan to  translate them into other languages. 
 
Page 34 (Para 35)  
In the recently concluded re-negotiation of the GPA, Japan added seven designated cities 
(shitei toshi ) to the entity coverage, and improve d its services coverage (13 new services 
sectors).  Furthermore, Japan undertook coverage commitments with regard to the Public 
Finance Initiative (PFI), including with respect to BOT contracts, and reduced its thresholds   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 73 
 
 
 for goods and services procured by central gove rnment entities to SDR 100,000.  It also 
agreed to the deletion of country-specific derogations. 
Questions: 
Whether Japan plans to include more cities a nd more service sectors into the government 
procurement scheme in future? 
 RESPONSE: At present, Japan does not plan to include more cities and more service sectors 
into the government procurement scheme in the future. 
 
Page 42 (Para 61)  
During the period under review, Japan submitted 41 SPS notifications to the WTO.  Over 30 
of the revisions include changes to maximu m residue limits (MRLs) for pesticides and 
amendments on food additives.  According to  the authorities, Japan has systematically 
reviewed the MRLs for the target compounds or components based on risk evaluation from a 
purely scientific standpoint, taking into consid eration the food intake of the Japanese 
population. 
 
Questions: 
1) A large number of new inspection items and frequent inspections prolong the custom 
clearance time,  increase su ch custom clearance costs as warehousing and inspection 
costs of imported products, undermine the competitiveness of relevant products exported 
by other countries into Japan and create barrier s for international trade. Please consider the 
rationality of such practices. 
2) Is there any evaluation on the burden on impor ters caused by strict inspection standards 
and procedures? Is there any improvement measure? 
 
RESPONSE:  In Japan, monitoring inspections and or dered inspections are carried out at the 
time of importation. Monitoring inspection is performed to evaluate the actual hygienic situation of imported foods 
with the cost burden placed on the government.  
Ordered inspection is conducted for foods that have a high pr obability of violation with the 
cost burden placed on the importer. And these insp ections are necessary to ensure food safety. 
Importers are not able to proceed with the impor t procedures until the test result of the ordered 
inspection becomes clear.  
Ordered inspection is enforced on a limited num ber of food products and items with a high 
possibility of violation, in order to minimize importer’s costs. In cases where the exporting country has taken e ffective preventive measures, the inspection 
order shall be cancelled.  11. MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING EXPORTS 
(i) Procedures 
 
Page 45 (Para 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. 
 
Questions: 
Plase indicate what documents should be submitte d to the Japan Customs when the imports 
goes through customs procedures.   
RESPONSE: Importers must declare the description, quantity, price of the import goods, and WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 74 
 
 
 other necessary particulars with the impor t declaration form accompanied by necessary 
documents such as: 
・Invoice 
・Bill of landing (or Air Way Bill) 
・Insurance certificate 
・Freight account 
・Packing list 
 
Additional documents may be required de pending on the type of the import goods. 
Please refer to the Customs Website for more detail. http://www.customs.go.jp/english/c-answer_e/imtsukan/1107_e.htm  
 
Page 51 (Para 105)  
With a view to stimulating the domestic ec onomy, the Japanese government re-introduced 
subsidies for purchasing new environmentally friendly vehicles in December 2011;  subsidies are provided for individuals that purchase any vehi cle, domestically produced or imported, that 
meets certain criteria. 
 
Questions: 
Since the end of 2011, the Japanese government  has re-introduced subsidies for purchasing 
new environmentally friendly vehicles. Whethe r this measure will also benefit imported 
vehicles? Please illustrate it by number. 
 
RESPONSE: The subsidies were introduced in December of 2011 and expired in September 
of 2012. The measure also benefited imported vehicles. The number of foreign manufacturers’ 
registered imported vehicles which were subs idized was about 110,000 for the 10 months. 
 
Page 57 (Para 124) 
Against this background, the National IP Stra tegic 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  intensify their efforts in international 
standard-setting processes, particularly in sev en technological fields:  advanced medical 
technologies, water, next generation vehicles, railway, energy management, digital contents, 
and robotics. 
 
Questions: 
1）Is there any disposal rule under Japanese domest ic laws in relation to patents involved in 
standards? If any, please introduce it in detail.  E.g. whether the participants engaged in 
standards formulation are obligated to disclose their patents and what legal consequences will 
be caused by any violation of such obligations? 
2）Is there any difference between the license on the patents included in standards and the 
license on ordinary patents under Japanese laws? Is  there any limitation on transfer of such 
patents? 
 
RESPONSE:  
1) There is no disposal rule that is exclusivel y applied to patents involved in standards under 
Japanese national laws.  2) As to the license on patents, there is no difference between license on patents included in 
standards and ordinary patents under Japanese nati onal laws. In addition, there is no limitation 
on transfer of such patents. 
 
Page 58 (Para 130)   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 75 
 
 
 In order to encourage innovation and patenting activity in environmental technology, the JPO 
established a green-related accelerated patent ex amination pilot programme in 2009:  the 
pendency of first official action was shortened from an average 22 months to about 2 months. 
 
Questions: 
When does this 22-month period commence? 
RESPONSE: This period commences when the request for examination is filed.  
 
Page 59 (Para 133) 
The Japanese Intellectual Property Associati on (JIPA) introduced the Green Technology 
Package Programme (GTPP) in 2010, with the main purpose of establishing a global 
comprehensive environmental technology inform ation database, which would facilitate the 
transfer of technology between prospectiv e technology users and potential providers 
worldwide. 
 
Questions: 
1） Has this database begun to operate? If yes, how many technology transfers have been 
completed through this platform?   
 
RESPONSE:  Japan understands that, as described in Paragraph 134 of the report by the WTO 
Secretariat, the WIPO established the “WIPO Green” project as one of the WIPO measures based on the GTPP concept proposed by th e JIPA, a non-profit and non-governmental 
organization. Japan also understands that th e JIPA has been cooperating with WIPO in 
launching the project. (Japan understands that, in  other words, the GTPP has been taken over 
by the “WIPO Green”.) In addition, Japan understands that the WIPO  has already launched the “WIPO Green” on a 
trial basis.  For further details, please refer to the WIPO website etc. 
2） Please provide the relevant information on tr ansfer of green technology from Japan to 
developing countries and less developed count ries and the details on cooperation between 
Japan and developing countries and less deve loped countries with regard to green 
technology. 
 
RESPONSE: Japan has been promoting transfer of cutting-edge technologies to developing 
countries and less developed countries aiming to support these countries’ green growth. For example, Japan promotes transfer of green technologies through supporting overseas 
expansion of environmental technologies for water and the atmosphere as well as low-carbon 
technologies, and by promoting international expa nsion of waste disposal industries. Japan’s 
technical assistance extends to the design of in stitutional arrangements and the promotion of 
human resource development. 
 
Page 61 (Para 143) 
These efforts raised the number of first offici al 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 44 8,123 over the same period.  The period of 
the first action pendency was shortened from 28.7 months in 2010 to 25.9 months in 2011. 
However, this is still a long way from the target of less than 11 months by 2013. 
 Questions: 
1） When does the period of the first action pende ncy begin? Whether it is the same as the 
commencement date of the period of the firs t action pendency mentioned in Paragraph 130 
of the Report? WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 76 
 
 
 2） What measures JPO intends to adopt to shor ten the period of the first action pendency 
from 25.9 months to less than 11 months within two years? 
 RESPONSE: 
1) The first action pendency is in principle the period from request for examination to the first 
office action. On the other hand, in the excep tional case of an accelerated patent examination 
program, it defines the period from request for accelerated examination to the first office 
action. Therefore, the two-month period in th e green-related accelerated patent examination 
program in Paragraph 130 of the Report begins  from the day when the accelerated examination 
is requested.  2) In order to reduce the period of the first ac tion pendency, the JPO will continue to promote 
the outsourcing of prior art searches while maki ng the best use of the increased number of 
patent examiners, up at about 1,700. 
 
Page 66 (Para 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-C ounterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), with a 
view to establishing an international framework  for combating counterfeiting and piracy.  The 
negotiations were basically concluded in Oct ober 2010, and the agreement has been open for 
signature by 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.  
 
Questions: 
Japan has signed the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Ag reement in 2010. What measures will Japan 
adopt in future to avoid causing trade barriers to the developing countries with a relatively low level of IPR protection?  
RESPONSE: Adequate protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR) are 
vital for sustainable development of global ec onomy and trade. Japan has been developing and 
implementing a national IPR protection system whic h is fully consistent with its commitments 
under existing international rules, and it believ es that the current system is implemented 
without presenting barriers to trade. 
 Japan also has been seriously engaging, and w ill continue to do so, in cooperation for trade 
facilitation as well as promoting the development of the IPR protection systems and capacity 
of the developing Members.  
 
Page 70 (Para 186) 
Japan participates in OECD committees a nd working groups established to increase 
cooperation in competition policy; it also partic ipates 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 agai nst anti-competitive activities in accordance with 
its laws and regulations, and to  cooperate in controlling anti-competitive activities, e.g. by 
notifying the other party of enforcement activ ities, cooperation, coordination, requests for 
enforcement activities, and consideration of the ot her party's interests.  Japan has three other 
bilateral cooperation agreements on anti-compe titive activities, with Canada, the European 
Union, and the United States.  Questions: 
What other countries will be those that Japan  plans to conclude bilateral cooperation 
agreements on anti-competitive activities with?   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 77 
 
 
  
RESPONSE:  At this moment Japan has no plan to conclude additional bilateral cooperation 
agreements on anti-competitive activities. On the other hand, the Japan Fair Trade Commission 
is currently negotiating with competition author ities of several economies, including China, to 
draw up memorandums on cooperation on comp etition policy, which are not bilateral 
cooperation agreements.  12
 MEASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE  
(i) Taxation and tax-related assistance 
(a) Tax incentives 
 
Page 50 (Para 100) 
The focus of Japan's system of tax incen tives is on achieving various policy objectives, 
including investment to address environmental concerns or promote R&D. The incentives are 
detailed in the Special Taxation Measures Law, which 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 through these tax incentives is about ¥5 trillion. 
 
Questions: 
Could Japan introduce tax incentives on achieving various policy objectives, like the 
investment for each priority area and the subdivided tax incentive for each area? Could Japan elaborate on the 29 tax measures abo lished and 67 tax measures modified? 
 
RESPONSE:  Changes to the Japanese tax system are made every year, and the decisions on 
what changes to make are made following delib erations by bodies such as the government’s 
Tax Commission. These deliberations focus on requests and opinions submitted by government ministries and agencies to the tax au thorities, and take into account the economic 
climate and fiscal situation 。With regard to details of tax reforms since 2010, please refer to 
the following websites. 
 
(i) Subsidies and other financial assistance 
 
Page 50 (Para 103) 
Japan has notified various specific subsidy programm es to the WTO.  In its latest notification, 
Japan indicated 67 subsidy schemes to assist civil aircraft, agriculture and fisheries, industry, 
and finance.  The notification lists, items elim inated since the notification in 2009, including 
assistance or subsidies related to:  civil aircraft;  fuel cell systems;  oil spill response programme;  biofuel;  nuclear energy technology development;  natural gas storage; research for the promotion of natural gas in re gional areas;  research and development of salt 
manufacturing technology;  soybean;  fruits;  cocoons;  wood industry upgrading fund; 
and the Japan Finance Corporation. 
 
Questions: 
What is the volume of subsidy to each of 67 subsidy schemes, a nd how to subsidize? 
 
RESPONSE: Regarding the details (including the volu me) of subsidy schemes, please refer to 
the Japanese Government notification (G/SCM/N/220/JPN), dated 29 June 2011.  
Page 50-51 (Para 104, 105) 
The notification included some newly introduced subsidies, for:  promoting the introduction 
of certain boilers;  loans to develop domestic  oil and natural gas;  projects concerning the 
stable supply of petroleum products as well as petroleum from oil-producing countries; WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 78 
 
 
 developing advanced future fuel technology;  advancement of reprocessing fuel;  promoting 
gas centrifuge to develop uranium enrichment te chnology;  finance measures related to Sake 
manufacturers;  and subsidy for Japan Finance Corporation. With a view to stimulating the domestic ec onomy, the Japanese government re-introduced 
subsidies for purchasing new environmentally friendly vehicles in December 2011; subsidies 
are provided for individuals that purchase any vehi cle, domestically produced or imported, that 
meets certain criteria. 
 
Questions: 
The details of such subsidies such as the sc ope of products, the volume for each of this 
purchase, the criteria for such subsidies and the actual recipients of such subsidies. 
 
RESPONSE: The scope of the subsidies for “Eco-Car” is passenger cars, trucks, and buses. 
The volume of the subsidies is 70,000 or 100,0 00 yen for each passenger car and 200,000 to 
900,000 yen for each truck or each bus, depending on the size and weight. The criteria for the 
subsidies are the achievement of the 2015 FY Jap anese fuel efficiency standard or the 2010 FY 
Japanese fuel efficiency standard +25%. Th e actual recipients are the consumers and 
companies that have purchased cars which meet the criteria. 
 
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
Page 87 (Table IV.6) 
Specific taxes on financial transactions:  No financial transaction tax (FTT);  incomes 
from financial transactions are subject to tax;  – tax on individuals differs by type of income
 
Questions: 
On January 22, 2013, EU Finance Ministers a pproved to adopt the financing transaction tax 
in 11 member states of EU. What is Japan's vi ew on levying the financing transaction tax and 
whether Japan plans to levy the fi nancing transaction tax in future? 
 RESPONSE: Japan is aware that EU Finance Mini sters approved to adopt the financing 
transaction tax in 11 member states of EU on 22  January, 2013. In general, since financial 
transactions are now borderless, it is pointed ou t that introduction of   financing transaction 
tax may cause shift of transactions to other areas.  Japan will continue to carefully watch the 
domestic discussion on the financing transaction tax.  
 
Page 87 (Para 45) 
Some post-2008 financial crisis measures are still in force.  For example the prohibition of 
naked short selling, which was time bound (6 m onths), was renewed 11 times and is still in 
force.  Similarly, the Financial Instru ment Act, which regulates over-the-counter 
transactions, has been revised so that all tr ansactions on derivatives are subject to FSA 
supervision.  Operators of such transactions ha ve been obliged to use the clearing system, so 
as to allow the FSA to trace their transactions.  The regulation on hedge funds has also been 
reinforced.  Questions: 
1) Please introduce the status quo and regulatory frameworks of Japan's derivatives market. 
 
RESPONSE: In order to enhance the transparency a nd stability of derivative markets, the use 
of central counterparties for clearing over-the-c ounter derivatives transactions, data storage 
and the reporting of trading information by financial instruments business operators were 
made mandatory in the revised Financia l Instruments and Exchange Act in 2010. 
Furthermore, in 2012, the Financial Instrument s and Exchange Act was  revised to introduce 
the mandatory use of electronic trading platfo rms by financial instruments business operators. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 79 
 
 
 2) On March 30, 2012, FSA published the capital adequacy rules for internationally active 
banks based on Basel III, which will be implemented from March 31, 2013. Please introduce Japan's implementation of Basel III, updates on the formulation and implementation of the macro prudentia l policy and the views on cross-border 
coordination in relation to the macro prudential policy. 
 
RESPONSE: A new Capital Adequacy Ratio regulati on for banks subject to international 
standards in accordance with Basel III will be  implemented from March 2013. As far as 
banks that focus on domestic operations are concerned, the implementation will start from 
March 2014 in a phased manner, with a 10 year tr ansition period. It is highly important that 
international agreements on gl obal financial regulatory reforms are steadily implemented by 
each country in a coordinated manner. 
 
Page 87 (Para 46) 
…Japan Post Insurance and Japan Post Bank ar e very significant financial services players. 
Their network extends all over the territory and there is a long-standing tradition by the 
Japanese population to deposit savings and to subscr ibe to life insurance with this public or 
semi-public institution.  Japan Post Bank is the largest bank in the world, with 
approximately US$2,000 billion of deposits, i.e. 22.3% of banking  deposits in Japan.  Japan 
Post Insurance is in the same position with a pproximately US$1,000 billion (¥93 trillion, as 
of March 2012) of assets. 
 
Questions: 
Please introduce the business scope of Japanese posta l insurance companies, e.g. insurance 
business, utilization scope of insurance proceed s and whether postal insurance companies are 
consistent with commercial insurance compani es in terms of business development and funds 
utilization. 
 
RESPONSE: The business scope of the Japan Post  Insurance includes the following: 
(a)Life insurance business (b)Representing businesses or carrying out services on behalf of other insurance companies 
(including foreign insurers) and other persons ca rrying out financial affairs; loan guarantee; 
and other business related to the preceding item 
(c)Sale and purchase of national governme nt bonds, local government bonds or 
government-guaranteed bonds; subscription or commissioning the administration of local government bonds, company bonds or other bon ds; and other business allowed under the 
Insurance Business Act including business which a life insurance company can carry out in 
accordance with other laws 
(d)Administrative affairs of postal life insura nce (life insurance taken out prior to the 
privatization of Japan Post) entrusted by th e Management Organization for Postal Savings 
and Postal Life Insurance 
(e)Other business related to the above items 
 
The composition of assets of the Japan Post  Insurance is as follows (March 31, 2012). 
(Billion yen) 
Total assets      93,688.6 (100%) Corporate and government bonds    73,967.5 (79.0%) 
Loans       13,929 (14.9%) 
Receivables under securities borrowing transactions  1,972.8 (2.1%) 
Cash and deposits / Call loans     1,822.6 (1.9%) Foreign securities      618.6 (0.7%) Money held in trust      242.7 (0.3%) 
Monetary claims purchased     14.5 (0.0%) 
Others       1,120.5 (1.2%) WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 80 
 
 
 [Excerpt from the “Annual Report 2012” available at 
http://www.japanpost.jp/en/group/disclosure/ ] 
With regard to new products by the Japan Post  Insurance, the provisi ons of the Insurance 
Business Act apply in the same way as with ot her insurance companies. In addition, the 
Postal Services Privatization Act provides “add- on regulations” which requi re that equivalent 
conditions of competition with  other insurance companies are ensured. As far as asset 
management by the Japan Post Insurance is concerned, the provisions of the Insurance 
Business Act apply in the same wa y as other insurance companies.  
 
Page 88 (Para 48) 
The main provisions of the revised Postal Service Privatization Act are that:  the number of subsidiaries of Japan Post Holding will be redu ced from four to three by the integration of 
Japan Post Services and Japan Network;  Japan Post Group will have to provide, in a unified 
manner through its post office network, universal  services for postal services and fair access 
all over Japan to savings and insurance services;  Japan Post Holdings will aim to dispose of 
all the shares of JP Bank and JP Insurance as s oon as possible, while taking into consideration 
the business conditions of both companies and the results of the implementation of the Act on 
the responsibility for ensuring basic postal servi ces;  the minimum threshold of shares that 
the Government must maintain at any time has not been revised and remains at one third; 
subject to the adoption of new regulations JP  Bank and JP Insurance will be allowed to 
launch new products (e.g. medical insurance) under the same regulatory framework as their 
private-sector counterparts as soon as the Government has sold half of its shares, and cross-ownership among Japan Post Hold ings subsidiaries will be allowed. 
 
Questions: 
1) Are foreign service providers allowed to hold shares of Japanese postal companies after 
the privatization reform of the Japan posta l service? If so, please indicate the criteria and 
approval procedures for foreign service provi ders to hold the share of Japanese postal 
companies; if not, please indicate whether there is a plan to give shareholding access to foreign services providers. 
 
RESPONSE: There is no restriction for foreign investors on the shareholding of the Japan 
Post Group.  The Government of Japan has the responsibility of constantly holding over 1/3 of the shares 
of the Japan Post Holdings. At  the same time, it will dispose its shares in the Japan Post 
Holdings, other than the ones to be held by the Government, at the earliest possible time. 
cf. Article 7 of the Postal Services Privatizati on Act (Act No.97 of 2005), Article 2 of the Act 
on Japan Post Holdings Co. Ltd.,(Act No.98 of 2005) and Article 3 of the Supplementary Provisions of the Act.  The Japan Post Holdings has the responsibility of  always holding all the shares of the Japan 
Post Services Company. cf. Article 6 of the Act on Japan Post Holdings  Co. Ltd., (Act No.98 
of 2005).  The Japan Post Holdings will aim to dispose of  all the shares of the Japan Post Bank and the 
Japan Post Insurance as soon as possible, while taking into consideration the business 
conditions of both companies and the influen ce on the implementation of the responsibility 
for ensuring basic postal services (the Postal Se rvices Privatization Act stipulates that postal 
services, simple savings, money transfers, debt s and credit settlements and insurance services 
should be made available in post offices integr ally, equally and universally throughout the 
country in a simple and user-friendly manner).  cf. Article 7 and 62 of Postal Service 
Privatization Act (Act No.97 of 2005). 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 81 
 
 
 2) Are there corresponding reform measures to the subsidy mechanism of universal postal 
services in the revised Postal Service Priva tization Act? And are there new measures to 
the arrangement of the postal fund? 
RESPONSE: None.  
 Page 89 (Table IV.7) 
Regulatory framework Supervisory authorities: 
Ministry/agency responsible for defining bank ing sector policy:  the Financial Service
Agency (FSA) 
Sector supervisor (monitoring bank liquidi ty, overseeing payment and settlement system
s
etc):  FSA and the Bank of Japan 
Responsibility for competition policy issu es: the Japan Fair Trade Commission 
 
Questions: 
What are the respective duties of FSA and BOJ in overseeing payment and settlement 
systems? 
 
RESPONSE: FSA conducts oversight on payment and se ttlement through the supervision of 
financial instruments clearing organizations, book-entry transfer institutions and funds 
clearing institutions, in accordance with the Fina ncial Instruments and Exchange Act, Act on 
Book-Entry Transfer of Company Bonds, Shares, etc., and the Payment Services Act.  BOJ conducts oversight of FMIs mainly to pur sue its objective to “ensure smooth settlement 
of funds among banks and other financial ins titutions” (Article 1, Paragraph 2 of the BOJ 
Act). In light of BOJ’s oversight role in pursuing its objectives under the BOJ Act, the 
Payment Services Act (Article 86) and FIEA (A rticle 156-20 (23)) states that the FSA may 
seek the opinion of BOJ in cases where it sees th e need to take regulatory action against 
relevant FMIs. 
 
Page 95 (Para 68) 
By law, the Government shall hold a share of 33 .3% in NTT.  This is the only case of public 
ownership in the sector.  Foreign particip ation in NTT was 24.2% on 31 March 2012 
according to the compulsory annual securities report for listed companies.  Table IV.11 details the regulatory regime of telecommunications in Japan and its main economic indicators. 
 
Questions: 
In accordance with Article 4 of the NTT Law, the government must hold 1/3 shares of NTT 
and the foreign participation in NTT must not exceed 1/3. Do such shareholding limits comply with the policies on opening Japan's telecommunication market to the public? Does Japan plan to promote the relevant reforms recently? 
 
Comments: In 2001, the provisions in the NTT Law regarding limits on foreign participation 
have been amended. In accordance with Article  4 of the Law: the foreign participation in 
NTT must not exceed 1/3 (note: foreign partic ipation being 24.19% on March 31, 2012) and 
the proportion of the shares held by the governme nt remains the same, that is, more than 1/3 
(note: government shareholding being 32.63% on March 31, 2012). 
In addition, at the time of reconstruction in 1999, NTT established “NTT Holding” holding 
100% shares of NTT East and NTT West (operating landline business) and NTT COM 
(operating long-term telecommunication business) . This practice remains unchanged so far. 
 
As Japanese government controls the sharehol ding proportion in NTT and grants NTT a 
special position, NTT still monopolies the mark et after 30 years when Japan opened its WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 82 
 
 
 telecommunication market. In the Evaluation on Competition in the Telecommunication 
Market  published by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications in September 
2011, the Ministry of Internal Affa irs and Communications evaluates the 
Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) and the ma rket shares of NTT Group which has the 
market dominant power. The following table showing HHI of top 3 telecommunication 
markets by the end of March, 2011. (Note: in case of the landline telecommunication market, it is the market shares of NTT East and NTT West; in case of mobile telecommunication market, it is the market shares of NTT docomo;  and in case of broadband market, it is the 
market shares of NTT Group.) 
 
Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) of  Top 3 Telecommunication Markets 
   HHI NTT            market share   market dominant power 
landline 
telecommunication market 6643 80.8% yes/monopoly 
mobile 
telecommunication 
market 3386 47.1% Yes 
broadband market 2994 52.5% Yes 
 
RESPONSE: Given the NTT’s important public role such as responsibility of providing 
universal services, promoting research and disseminating research result, the government becomes the stable shareholder in order to prevent any domination of NTT management or abuse of shareholder right by specific entities,  ensure the stability of company management 
and appropriate business operations. From these re asons, the government is obliged to hold 
the shares of NTT. 
 NTT is a shareholder of NTT East and NTT West where provide most of the communications infrastructures as a foundation of social activity. Foreign investment restrictions applied to 
NTT, which is deeply related to national secu rity, from avoiding national security issues and 
influences received by controlling foreign countries. 
 
There is no plan for neither relaxing nor abo lishing the above mentioned measure at this 
point. 
 
Page 91 (Para 71) 
NTT East and NTT West are officially designated as the dominant suppliers for subscriber lines, and NTT DOCOMO for mobile telephony, with  the obligations attached to that status. 
 
Questions: 
NTT East and NTT West are the only telecomm unication operators officially designated by 
the government to “establish Type I telecommunication facilities” and operate “the 
designated telecommunication business”. What are the reasons for Japanese government to 
grant such a privileged position to NTT? Does this  comply with the principles of fair market 
competition?  Comments: In accordance with Article 33 of  the Telecommunication Law of Japan, the 
Minister of Internal Affairs and Communicati ons will publish orders of the Ministry of 
Internal Affairs and Communications to de termine the operators establishing Type I 
telecommunication facilities. Currently, the Jap anese government only designates NTT East 
and NTT West as the operators establishi ng Type I telecommunication facilities. In 
accordance with Article 20 of the Telecommuni cation Law of Japan: the operation of the 
designated telecommunication business is subject to the following 3 conditions:   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 83 
 
 
  
1）The operators establishing Type I telecomm unication facilities uses the telecommunication 
business provided through the facilities; 
2）Other telecommunication operators are unable to  effectively provide these and alternative 
telecommunication business; 
3）The business is provided based on appropriate charging terms and users’ interests may be 
safeguarded. 
 
As above stipulated, only NTT East and N TT West may provide the designated business in 
Japan and other operators can only provide those business not designated. (Note: the 
designated business mainly refers to the basic telecommunication business.) 
 
RESPONSE: Under the Ministerial Ordinance based on the Telecommunications Business 
Act Article 33-1, when the local loops of a telecommunication carrier represent more than 
50% of the share of each given area, such local loops and combined telecommunication 
facilities are designated as Type I telecommunication facilities. Based on this, the telecommunication facilities of NTT East and NTT West are designated as Type I telecommunication facilities.  
Type I telecommunication facilities are subject to  the requirement of approval, etc., on the 
access charge and terms of service. And some ser vices supplied with these facilities, such as 
the access charge and terms of service, are s ubject to the obligation of notification. 
 As just described, the designation sets asymmetric  regulations to ensure fair competition and 
grants no special rights to NTT.  PART II: QUESTIONS REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT REPORT 
I. TRADE AND ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 
Page 5 (Para 1) 
The Japanese economy, which had been in an  expansionary phase since March 2009, was 
temporarily stagnated by the Great East Japan  Earthquake in March 2011, mainly due to a 
sharp decline in production and private consumption.  After that, the economy picked up as the supply chains of production activities were grad ually re-established.  In the first half of 
2012, the Japanese economy was on the way to recove ry at a moderate pace mainly driven by 
domestic demand including reconstruction dema nd, although it has sounded a weak tone 
recently due to the deceleration of the worl d economy.  Regarding prices, the Japanese 
economy is in a mild deflationary phase, althoug h the tempo of deflation has been slower.  
 
Questions: 
How does Japan plan to recover industrial ch ains and conduct reconstruction after the 
earthquake in 2011? What measures have b een adopted? What are the initial effects? 
 
RESPONSE:  Japan implemented a subsidy measure aiming to promote new investment and 
create jobs in Japan, and improve the site lo cation environment for companies in Japan by 
providing measures to encourage companies to  locate their production bases domestically.  
 
III. TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT 
Page 17 (Para 58) 
The One Village, One Product (OVOP) is one of the typical approaches under these 
initiatives.  OVOP is a movement which suppor ts local economies through the development, 
improvement and promotion of local products (f oods, beverages, textiles & garments, etc.) 
with the participation of local people.  This  movement was first initiated in a southern 
prefecture in Japan in the late 1970s and later sp read to the other prefectures.  It has been WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 84 
 
 
 introduced and has contributed to the development of local economies in other Asian 
countries. 
 
 
Questions: 
In the approaches of the One Village, One Pr oduct, are there new policies on the exports 
proposed by the Japanese government at all levels? 
 
RESPONSE:  For the time being, Japan will con tinue the current OVOP policy for the 
promotion of exports from developing countries. 
 
(2) GROWTH AND FISCAL CONSOLIDATION 
Page 20 (Para 77) 
In addition, the Government aims to expa nd foreign demand by harnessing the world’s 
growth potential.  Therefore, the Government  has implemented policy measures such as the 
promotion of economic partners hips, enhancement of overseas deployment of integrated 
infrastructure systems and the acceleration of ex ports of agriculture, forestry, and fisheries 
products. 
 
Questions: 
1) Please indicate the specific measures taken by the Japanese government on promoting 
exports. 
 
RESPONSE: Japan expects that enhancement of the multilateral trading system under the 
WTO and promotion of EPAs as means of complementing the MTS contribute to the 
expansion of export from Japan.  
2) Does the acceleration of exports of agriculture , forestry, and fisheries products lead to 
loose supervision on food security, especially to loose criteria on the agriculture, forestry, 
and fisheries products that were produced near nuclear power plants? 
 
RESPONSE: Acceleration of exports of agriculture, forestry, and fishery products will not 
compromise the safety of these foods. 
 Japan takes objective measures for ensuring food sa fety, i.e., to restrict the distribution of 
foods exceeding standard limits for radionuclides under the guidelines of the Nuclear Emergency Response Headquarters. These measure s are also applied to foods for export. 
Japan follows Article 4.2 of the Code of Et hics for International Trade in Food including 
Concessional and Food Aid Transactions (CAC/ RCP 20-1979) namely, "Without prejudice to 
the rights and obligations conferred by bilatera l or multilateral agreements, no food, including 
in the context of concessional and food aid tr ansactions, should be allowed for export or 
re-export which does not comply with the requirements imposed by the legislation of the exporting country…".  Page 23 (Para 90) 
The JFTC issued “Guidelines Concerning Abuse of Superior Bargaining Position under the 
Antimonopoly Act” on 30 November 2010, follow ing the introduction of surcharges against 
the abuse of superior bargaining position, and thereby, the predictability for foreign 
companies has been enhanced. 
 
Questions: 
Please further explain the effect of “Guidelin es Concerning Abuse of Superior Bargaining 
Position under the Antimonopoly Act”in promoti ng the predictability for foreign companies. 
 
RESPONSE: Providing the basic concept of the regulation of the abuse of superior   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 85 
 
 
 bargaining positions and categories of acts that  constitute abuse of superior bargaining 
positions, the "Guidelines Concerning Abuse of  Superior Bargaining Positions under the 
Antimonopoly Act" also presents "case examples " and "hypothetical examples" in order to 
help the understanding of what specific acts ar e deemed to be abuse of superior bargaining 
positions, leading to enhancing predictability. Sin ce the tentative translation of the Guidelines 
is published in the web site of the Japan Fair  Trade Commission, foreign companies can refer 
to them. 
(Reference) 
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/legislation_guide lines/ama/pdf/101130GL.pdf#search=%27abuse+of
+superior+bargaining%27  
 
Page 23 (Para 91) 
The JFTC has been taking rigorous legal acti ons against violations of the AMA.  The 
number of legal cases against such violations amounted to 20 in 2010 and 15 in 2011. 
Details of these cases can be found below.  Questions: 
Please further explain the violations of the antimonopoly act found by Japan. 
 
RESPONSE: A summary of main cases is described in the Annual Reports submitted to the 
OECD Competition Committee by the JFTC. Th e reports are published on the JFTC’s 
website below. Further details  of individual cases are provided in the English press releases 
of JFTC.  (Annual Reports) http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/about_jftc/annual_reports/index.html  
(Press releases of JFTC) http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleases/index.html  
 
Page 24 (Para 97) 
In the tourism sector, the “Tourism Nation Promotion Basic Plan” was approved by the Cabinet in March 2012.  “Broadening of the b ase of tourism” and “Improvement of tourism 
quality” are the main approaches of this plan.  Questions: 
Please elaborate on policies under the plan on tourism investment (especially including those regarding attraction of foreign investments). 
 
RESPONSE:  The Japan Tourism Agency does not ha ve any specific policies or plans for 
tourism investments, including the attraction of foreign investments.  COMPETITION POLICY 
 
Page 88 (Para 23) 
The bill to amend the Antimonopoly Act (AMA) was submitted to the 174th ordinary session of the Diet on 12 March 2010.  It contains th e abolition of hearing procedure of the Japan 
Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) for administrative appeal and necessary revisions to develop procedures for hearings prior to the issue of the JFTC's administrative orders, such as cease 
and desist orders, and so forth.  The above bill was under deliberation in the 180th ordinary 
session of the Diet as of July 2012. 
 
Questions: 
1）Please introduce the revision procedure of the Japanese Antimonopoly Act. 
2）As it is mentioned in the paragraph above th at it(JFTC) contains the abolition of hearing 
procedure of the Japan Fair Trade Commis sion (JFTC) for administrative appeal and WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 86 
 
 
 necessary revisions to develop procedures for h earings prior to the issue of the JFTC's 
administrative orders, please indicate reasons why the hearing procedure is to be abolished or 
revised and introduce the applicable heari ng procedure for JFTC in the future.  
 
 
RESPONSE: 
1) The revision procedure of the Japanese Antimonopoly Act is the same as other laws. A 
legislative bill, which is submitted to the Di et, becomes a law when it passes both the House 
of Representatives and the House of Councilors. 
2) With regard to the hearing procedure by  the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC), it has 
been pointed out as lacking fairness because while  JFTC issues administrative orders against 
violating companies it also reviews whether or not the administrative orders are appropriate.  A bill for amending the AMA, which was submitte d to the Diet in March 2012, includes the 
abolition of the hearing procedure conducte d by the JFTC and the consignment of 
administrative review to district courts regardi ng objections to administrative sanctions by the 
JFTC with a view to resolving criticisms on pr ocedural fairness. In addition, the amendment 
sets out further enhancement and transparency c oncerning ex ante procedures when the JFTC 
takes measures. The bill was scrapped due to th e dissolution of the House of Representatives 
in November 2012. The government is now  considering what the bill should be. 
 
The details of the bill are explained in the link below. http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleas es/archives/individual-000030.html  
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleases/uploads/2010-Mar-12_2.pdf  
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleases/uploads/2010-Mar-12_3.pdf  
 
Page 89 (Para 23) 
The JFTC reviewed the M&A regulations (inves tigation procedures and criteria) to further 
improve the swiftness, transparency, and pr edictability of M&A investigation while 
enhancing international conformity.  The JFTC, on 1 July 2011, abolished the prior 
consultation system and amended the rela ted Fair Trade Commission Rules, etc. 
 Questions: 
Please indicate reasons why the prior consultati on system was abolished and the related Fair 
Trade Commission Rules was amended. 
 
RESPONSE: Upon consideration of public comment made on the draft published by the 
Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC), the prior consultation system was abolished and the related Fair Trade Commission Rul es were amended, with attenti on to past review experience 
of the JFTC and to internati onal conformity. The amendments  were, in accordance with the 
changes in circumstances including the globalization of the economy, intended to further improve the speed, transparency, and predictab ility of business organizational restructuring. 
The details of the amendments ar e explained in the link below. 
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleas es/archives/individual-000432.html 
 
Other questions 
 
1. Article 11 (Obligations concerning Technologi cal Measures) of the World Intellectual 
Property Organization Copyright Treaty (herei nafter referred to as “WCT”) stipulates 
that:  “[c]ontracting Parties shall provide ade quate legal protection and effective legal 
remedies against the circumvention of effec tive technological measures that are used by 
authors in connection with the exercise of their rights under this Treaty or the Berne 
Convention and that restrict acts, in respect of their works, which are not authorized by   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 87 
 
 
 the authors concerned or permitted by law.” 
Question: WCT prohibits contracting parti es from circumventing technological measures. 
Currently, most contracting parties under WCT prohibit circumvention acts. However, Article 120bis of the Copyright Law of Japan only prohibits the acts of providing 
circumvention measures and providing circumvention services upon request by the public 
rather than the circumvention acts. Article 2 of the Unfair Competition Law of Japan also only prohibits the unfair competition acts of providing circumvention measures. Have the 
provisions under Article 11 of WCT been satisfied?  
RESPONSE: The obligation under Article 11 of the WCT is satisfied with the provisions of 
Copyright Act of Japan.  In addition to Article  120bis, Article 30 1 (ii) of Copyright Act of 
Japan provides that reproduction for private use by means of the circumvention of technological protection measures is excluded from the scope of limitation or exception to 
copyright. These provisions effectively prevent the circumvention of technological measures and meet the obligation under Article 11 of WCT. 
 
2. Question: No information on comprehensive le gislations in the telecommunication sector 
is mentioned in the Report by the Secretar iat. In 2007, Japanese government drafted the 
comprehensive legislations on telecommunica tions, broadcast and television. However, 
the Japanese government did not approve  the new amendment to the law on 
telecommunications, broadcast and televi sion until November, 2010. Please provide the 
updates on the comprehensive legislati ons in the telecommunication sector. 
 
(Comments: the Japanese government has not moved forward with respect to legislations and reforms in the telecommunication sector since 2000 in order to protect some interests 
and most parts of the aborted “comprehensiv e legislation” are related to laws on 
telecommunications, so it is worth paying a ttention to the updates on the comprehensive 
legislations in the telecommunication sector.)  
RESPONSE: Japan published the Act for Partial Revi sion of the Broadcast Act and Other 
Related Acts in December 2010, and adjusted the pertinent regulations in order to consolidate 
and rationalize institutions in response to the digitalization of the telecommunications and 
broadcast sector.  
 
3. Question: Japan implements the “universal service system”. Whether Japan plans to 
include the broadband business into the univer sal service with the development of the 
broadband business? How the development of the broadband infrastructures may be 
guaranteed through the universal service system? 
 RESPONSE: The current universal service system covers analog fixed-line phones, public 
telephone service and emergency calls. Now, ther e is no concrete study being conducted on 
widening the scope of the universal service to broadband.   
4. Question: Is there any new measure to regul ate abuses of intellectual property rights and 
balance interests of owners of intellectual pr operty rights and public interests in order to 
prevent such abuses from hindering free competition and technical and scientific innovation? 
 
RESPONSE: It is considered that there is no majo r issue related to abuses of intellectual 
property rights in Japan, so new measure has not been implemented to regulate them.  5. Since the end of September 2012, YEN has b een rapidly devalued against the main 
international currencies and has been deva lued by about 14% against US dollars. 
Recently, BOJ has announced to purchase the government debts of YEN 13 trillion from WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 88 
 
 
 January 2014 until the inflati on target of 2% is reached. 
Questions: 
1) What is the purpose of the policies promoting large devaluation of YEN? 
 
 
RESPONSE: Japan has no intention to promote devaluation of the yen at all. We are fully 
committed to abiding by our existing agreem ent of the G20 Summit on refraining from 
competitive devaluation.   
2) What are the adverse effects of the consid erable devaluation of YEN on exports of 
Japan’s trading partners and financial stability of the international market? 
 
RESPONSE: The current depreciation of the yen is a market-determined movement. 
(It is difficult to generalize the effects.) 
 
3) What are the effects of the indefinite monetary easy policy implemented by BOJ on 
the exchange rate of YEN and Japan’s trading conditions? 
 RESPONSE: The aim of the monetary policy conducted by the Bank of Japan is to 
overcome deflation as early as possible and achie ve sustainable economic growth with price 
stability.  In implementing its monetary policy objectives, the Bank of Japan does not aim to 
weaken the yen. 
 
6. Question: How will the Japanese government handle the challenges on Japan’s economic 
growth caused by the aging problem? 
 
RESPONSE:  It is considered that the main effect  of the aging problem is the reduction of 
labor input caused by a decrease in the labor force population. To deal with this problem, 
Japan is promoting measures in order to cr eate better working conditions for the young, 
women, the elderly and the disabled to facilitate their employment.  In addition, this developm ent of an aging society cau ses increasing social security 
expenditure, such as pension, medical care, nur sing, equating to 1 trillion yen every year, 
which has become a major factor in the budget deficit.  Therefore, the Japanese government has initiated a package reform of soci al security and tax 
in order to achieve fiscal consolidation and ensu re the stability of social security funding, to 
build a sustainable social security system, c overing the likes of pensions, medical care and 
nursing.  7. The electronic information sector is very important in the national economy of Japan, but 
the development of Japan’s electronic information sector has faced a declining trend since this year. 
 
Question: What measures will Japanese governme nt adopt and what are the strategic 
deployments with respect to such a declin ing trend in the development of Japan’s 
electronic information sector?  
RESPONSE: Technological innovation is very impor tant in the information technology 
sector, thus the Japanese Government has supported the development of innovative 
technologies, such as low-carbon products, for continuous growth in this sector. Service innovation and productivity enhanc ement in several fields by utilizing ICT infrastructure and 
services are also essential for continuous grow th of the Japanese economy as a whole. The 
average of the annual real GDP growth rate of the communications sector and information   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 89 
 
 
 sector in the past 15 years marked 4.9% and 7.7%  respectively, which are higher than that of 
the sum of all sectors. Accordingly, the ICT sect or carries out a core role for the economic 
growth in Japan. In the ICT sector, Japan pl ans to discuss measures from various angles to 
utilize ICT as its trump card in achieving economic revitalization, with a view to expansion in 
the global market. 
8. Question: Please provide information on the progress of development of Japan’s policy 
financing institutions and the next plans. 
 RESPONSE: The Japan Finance Corporation (JFC) was established in October 2008 with 
the integration of the National Life Finance Corporation (NLFC), the Agriculture, Forestry 
and Fisheries Finance Corporation (AFC), th e Japan Finance Corporation for Small and 
Medium Enterprise (JASME) and the Internationa l Financial Operations (IFOs) of the Japan 
Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC). Ho wever, the Japan Bank for International 
Cooperation was separated from the JFC in April 2012.  
Regarding the Development Bank of Japan and Shoko Chukin Bank Limited, it is provided 
for in the Development Bank of Japan Inc. Law and the Shoko Chukin Bank Limited Act that 
at the end of fiscal year 2014 the government will conduct a review of the organization which 
will include the future of government-held shares. 
 
9. Question: Whether the principal and the interest of the bonds issued by such policy 
financing institutions are guaranteed by government and whether the balance of the bonds will be included in the balance of the go vernment and public debts in its entirety? 
 RESPONSE: Public financial institutions issu e both government-guaranteed bonds and 
bonds with no governmental guarantee for repaym ent of principal and interest. Whether the 
balance of the bonds will be included in the ba lance of the government and public debts in 
its entirety depends on the accounting method.  In the System of National Accounts 
(published by Cabinet Office), general government gross liabilities do not include 
government-guaranteed bond s. 
 
10. Question: Please provide information on busin ess development and risk control of the 
Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBI C) after the Law of the Japan Bank for 
International Cooperation (hereinafter re ferred to as the “N ew JBIC Law”) was 
implemented in May 2011. 
 
RESPONSE: JBIC's mission is to contribute to the sound development of Japan and 
international economy and society by conducting financial operations in the following four 
fields: 
・Promoting the overseas development and securement of resources which are important for 
Japan 
・Maintaining and improving the internati onal competitiveness of Japanese industries 
・Promoting the overseas business having the purpos e of preserving the global environment, 
such as preventing global warming 
・Preventing disruptions to the international fi nancial order or taking appropriate measures 
with respect to damages ca used by such disruption 
 
JBIC recognizes the importance of risk mana gement and has put in place specific risk 
management systems in accordance with the t ype of risks to be identified in conducting 
operations as well as an integrated corporate risk management system. For the operation of 
these systems, JBIC has assigned individual offi cers responsible for specific risk management 
as well as units supervising specific risk ma nagement. JBIC has also established the 
Corporate Risk Management Committee, chaire d by the Governor, to discuss and study the WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 90 
 
 
 effective functioning of integrated corporate risk management. Further, there is the ALM 
(Asset Liability Management) Committee, which is  chaired by the Global Head of the Group 
responsible for the corporate risk management, and holds deliberations on asset and liability 
management. 
 
11. Please assess the impacts of the Japanese pos tal reform on the postal service market 
competitive. 
 
RESPONSE: The revised Postal Services Privatiza tion Act consolidated the Japan Post 
Network Company, which provided small lo t undertakings, and the Japan Post Service 
Company, which provided delivery and large lo t undertakings, into the Japan Post Company. 
 This consolidation should strengthen the comp etitiveness of postal services provided by the 
Japan Post Company through its expected higher customer convenience and operational 
efficiency.
 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 91 
 
 
 11. CANADA 
QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA 
 Government Report (WT/TPR/S/276) 
 
Part II. Trade and Investment Policy: (3)  FTA/EPAs; Table: Economic Partnership 
Agreements to which Japan is a party: paragraph  21, page  8: 
  
1. Japan has several sub-committees as part of  its EPAs, including on subjects such as 
intellectual property. What are typically Japan's objectives and purpose in establishing 
these types of sub-committees? 
 
RESPONSE 
Most of EPAs concluded by Japan contains a provision on each Chapter which mandates the 
establishment of a sub-committee. The obj ectives and purpose of establishing such 
sub-committees are to ensure effective implem entation and operation of each Chapter. The 
functions of the sub-committees are, for example, reviewing and monitoring the implementation and operation of each Chapter and discussing any issues related to that Chapter. 
 
Part IV. Japan’s Domestic Policies: (2) Grow th and Fiscal Consolidation: paragraph 78, 
page 20:  
Japan states “Moreover, the Government will put  into force measures to prevent industrial 
hollowing-out and promote inward investment, such as enhancing competitiveness through location subsidies; implement the subsidy program  for projects promoting Asian site location in 
Japan and encouraging inward investment; a nd utilize "Comprehensive Special Zones for 
International Competitiveness Development".”  
2. Could Japan elaborate on what industrial sectors will be targeted by the planned 
location subsidies? Also, could Japan specify  what subsidy measures will be used to 
encourage investment in Japan?  
 
RESPONSE:  The Japanese Subsidy Program for Domestic Site Location was offered for 
production bases in the fields of parts and material s which constitute the core part of the supply 
chain and cannot be replaced. The aim of this pr ogram is to promote new investment, maintain 
and create jobs in Japan, and improve the site location environment for companies in Japan by 
implementing measures to encourage companies to locate their production bases domestically. 
 
Part IV. Japan's Domestic Policies: (3) Intellectual Property Rights; Amendments to  the 
Unfair Competition Prevention Act: paragraph 80, page 21:  
 
3. Could Japan explain how it defines trade secr ets for this criminal regulation? Could 
Japan also provide the elements of each o ffence noted in 80 (1) and (2) as well as the 
penalties? 
 
RESPONSE 
The term "trade secret" as used in the Unfa ir Competition Act means technical or business 
information useful for commercial activities such as manufacturing or marketing methods that is 
kept secret and that is not publicly known. Th e regulations in paragraph 80 (1) provide the 
following procedures to define the trade secret information which is to be appropriately 
protected in criminal procedures conducted in response to trade secret infringement. (i) The court may rule not to disclose trade s ecret information at public trials (“protective 
rulings”) upon request of the victim or other parties. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 92 
 
 
 (ii) When a protective ruling has been given, th e court may rule to define expressions referring 
to items that may lead to identifi cation of trade secret information. 
(iii) When a protective ruling has been given, and upon satisfaction of certain conditions, the 
court may conduct examinations of witnesses and others, and questioning of the accused, on a 
day other than the trial date. 
Civil remedies, such as the right to seek injunctio n and/or damages, are also available for trade 
secret infringement and infringement by  devices and programs in 80 (2). 
The penal provision for trade secret infringement is imprisonment with work for not more than 
10 years or a fine of not more than 10,000,000 yen, or both.  The provision for infringement by 
devices and programs in 80 (2) is imprisonment with work for not more than 5 years or a fine of 
not more than 5,000,000 yen, or both.  
 
Part IV. Japan's Domestic Policies: (3) Inte llectual Property Rights; Amendments to the 
Patents Act: paragraph 81, page 21:  
 
4. Could Japan provide details regarding th e fee reductions for SMEs, as well as the 
remedial measures available for misappropria ted applications, and details concerning 
revisions made to the trail examination system? 
 
RESPONSE 
A. （The fee reductions for SMEs ） 
In order to make the fee reduction system more  effective, the patent fees reduction period 
was extended from 3 to 10 years for SMEs.  
（Remedial measures available fo r misappropriated applications ） 
Under the conventional system, any true right holder who suffers the filing of a 
misappropriated application may request a trial fo r invalidation of the patent right granted in 
response to the misappropriated application and have the patent invalidated. However, the 
remedies available for the true right holder ar e insufficient because of the absence of systems 
that allow the true right holder to retrieve the patent right. 
 
Therefore, it has been specified through the amendment that, if a patent is granted in 
response to a misappropriated application, etc., th e true right holder may, based on the right to 
obtain a patent, demand that the patentee who has obtained the patent right by filing a misappropriated application return the patent right. (Article 74 of the Patent Act, Article 17-2 of 
the Utility Model Act, and Artic le 26-2 of the Design Act) 
For further details, please refer to JPO Annual Report 2012 p.87 
http://www.jpo.go.jp/shiryou_e/toushin_e/ke nkyukai_e/pdf/annual_ report2012/part3.pdf  
 
（Reviewing the Appeals/Trial System and Related Systems ） 
Outline of the Patent Act amende d in 2011 with regard to appeals system is as follows: 
1) Prohibition on filing a request for a correction trial after filing a lawsuit against a trial 
decision 2) Restriction on assertions in retrials of cour t judgments in patent infringement lawsuits 
3) Development of provisions on the scope of a JPO trial decision that has become final and 
binding, etc. 
4) Abolition of the effect, on third parties, of a final and binding trial decision in a patent 
invalidation trial For further details, please refer to JPO Annual Report 2012 p.87, 110-111 http://www.jpo.go.jp/shiryou_e/toushin_e/ke nkyukai_e/pdf/annual_ report2012/part3.pdf  
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 93 
 
 
 Part IV. Japan's Domestic Policies: (3) In tellectual Property Rights; Amendments to 
the Copyright  Act: paragraph 82, page 21:  
 
5. Could Japan provide more specific details regarding these amendments made to its 
Copyright Act with respect to "incidental uses" and TPMs? 
 
RESPONSE 
With regard to ‘incidental use’, provisions that  prescribe that the following activities of using 
copyrighted works do not infringe on copyrights, etc., are laid down. 
- Use of incidental copyrighted works  
Example: Incidental appearance of something in a photo, etc., that is treated as a copyrighted 
work, other than the original subjects of the photo, etc. 
- Use of copyrighted works that is deemed necessary during the st age of carrying out reviews to 
obtain permission, etc.  Example: Preparation of documents before obtaining permission 
- Use of copyrighted works for trials for tec hnology development or practical application  
Example: Reproduction, etc., for research, de velopment, and verification on digital 
technologies relating to audio and video recording 
- Use of copyrighted works for information pr ocessing necessary for preparation for information 
provision through the use of information and communication technologies  
Example: Various reproductions on the Inte rnet that take place within servers 
 With regard to TPMs, in addition to protecti on technologies that are covered by technological 
protection measures for copyrights, etc. under the existing law (technologies based on signal-addition methods that are used for VHS and other formats), cryptographic technologies 
(technologies that are used for DVD and other fo rmats) are also covered by technological 
protection measures, and provisions to regulate the evasion of technological protection measures based on cryptographic technologies are laid down. 
 
Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/276) 
 
Summary, paragraph 20, page ix, and  
Part I. Economic Environment: (2) Macroeco nomic Policies: paragraph 5, page 3: 
 
The Secretariat’s Report indicates that Japan is  reviewing possible regulatory reform in the 
energy and utilities sector and its energy strategy  in general, in light of the March 2011 nuclear 
power plants accidents in north-eastern Japan. 
 
6. Could Japan provide an overview of the objectives for regulatory reform in the energy 
and utilities sector?   
7. Does Japan expect reforms to impact  how Japan procures in these sectors? 
 
8. Could Japan specify the status of its review?   
 RESPONSE:  After the Great East Japan Earthquake , the former government developed the 
new energy policy “Innovative Strategy for the Energy and the Environment.”This strategy aims 
to reduce the dependence on nuclear energy as well as on fossil fuels, by maximizing energy 
efficiency and renewable energy. 
 
※Innovative Strategy for Energy and the Environment  
http://www.npu.go.jp/en/policy/po licy06/pdf/201210 04/121004_en2.pdf  
(Outline) WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 94 
 
 
 http://www.npu.go.jp/en/policy/po licy06/pdf/201209 24/20120924_en.pdf  
However, the new administration is currently co nducting a zero-based review of the energy and 
environment strategy of the former administrati on and is forging a responsible energy policy 
taking into account the needs for stable energy supplies and reduction of energy costs. 
 
An outline of electric reform in Japan was suggested in a report which was compiled by 
Advisory Committee under METI in this month. Based on the report, the government of Japan will conduct examinations on the direction of elect ric power reform to be concluded at the end 
of this March. 
 
Part II. Trade Policy Regime: Framework and Objectives, (ii) Transparency and Policy 
Evaluation: paragraph 7, page 13: 
 
The Secretariat’s Report states that promoting tr ansparency remains a po licy priority for the 
Japanese Government. All laws and regulations are published in the Government Gazette and 
are made available on the internet. 
 9. Does Japan have a website that provides Eng lish or other language versions of content 
found on the “Official Gazette” notices? If yes, please provide the address to the 
electronic website or the name of any alternative publication medium. 
 
RESPONSE 
Japan neither publishes Official Gazette in  foreign languages nor has such websites. 
 
10. Are there any similar websites or publications at the prefecture level available? If yes, 
please provide the link(s) or the name  of any alternative publication. 
 
RESPONSE 
There are no lists of websites or publications in English of other languages at the prefecture 
level.  Part II. Trade Policy Regime: Framework and Objectives, (ii) Transparency and policy evaluation: paragraph 8, page 13: 
 
The Secretariat’s Report notes that under the “Government Policy Evaluations Act (GPEA) and 
the Basic Guidelines for Implementing Policy Eval uation, the Cabinet Office and ministries are 
required to evaluate their own policies before  and after implementation and to publish the 
results of these evaluations.” 
 
11. Are government procurement policies eval uated and published under this Act? 
 
RESPONSE 
The Cabinet Office and each ministry must eval uate their government procurement policies and 
publish the result under this Act if the governme nt procurement policies are included in the 
policies prescribed in the Act, namely R&D, pub lic construction, ODA, regulations, and special 
taxation measures.   
The results of the evaluation of each ministry can be found here (in Japanese only):  
http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/hyouka/seisaku_n/portal/index.html  
 
12. What are the criteria used as the b asis for evaluations under the GPEA? 
 RESPONSE   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 95 
 
 
 Under the Government Policy Evaluations Ac t (GPEA), Basic Guidelines for Implementing 
Policy Evaluation and Policy Evaluation Implementation Guidelines are prescribed. The documents for them are available at the following URL: 
URL：http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/hyouka/seisaku_n/pes.html 
 
13. Are results publicly available? If yes, please provide any website or name of the 
publication medium.  
 
RESPONSE 
The results of policy evaluation are shown in th e website of the Cabinet Office and ministries. 
(Links to web sites of the Cabinet Office and ministries) 
URL：http://www.kantei.go.jp/for eign/link/org/index.html 
 
Part II. Trade Policy Regime: Framework and Objectives: (3) Foreign Investment 
Regime; (ii) Investment promotion measures: paragraph 39, page 20: 
 
The Secretariat refers to Japan’s program “…to  utilize the special zone system to attract 
investment. Measures under this initiative would in clude the Special Zone for Reconstruction 
and the Comprehensive Special Zone System, where firms would be exempt from regulations 
and be provided fiscal and financial incentives.” 
 
14. Could Japan specify what kinds of fiscal and financial incentives will be provided to 
enterprises under the “Comprehensive Sp ecial Zone System”? Also, could Japan 
explain how the provisions of Article 3 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures will be taken into  consideration in implementing these 
subsidy programs? 
 
RESPONSE 
In the comprehensive special zone system , the Japanese Government carries out special 
measures on regulatory exceptions and provides ta x, fiscal and financial support for pioneering 
efforts that will lead to solutions for local issues and economic revitalization. 
 
・Summary of the Special Measures & Support Measures 
a) Regulatory Exceptions 
・Application of Regulatory Exceptions prescribed in the CSZ Law. 
e.g. special provisions within the Factory Location Act 
b) Tax Supports 
・For International Compe titiveness Development Zones 
Corporate tax reductions to strengthen international competitiveness  (select from 
investment tax credits, specially recognized depreciation, and taxable income deductions) 
・For Local Revitalization Zones 
Taxable income deductions for private inv estors targeting the regional undertaking. 
c) Fiscal Supports 
・High-priority use of relevant ministerial budgets. 
・Flexible distribution of special budget for development of Comprehensive Special Zone. 
※Fiscal Supports according to the conditions of relevant subsidies systems. 
d) Financial Supports 
Interest subsidy system (within 0.7% for 5 years)  
 Fiscal Supports of the CSZ system fall outside the scope of Article 3 of the Agreement on 
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, since these supports are subsidies contingent upon 
neither export performance nor the use of domestic over imported goods. 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 96 
 
 
  
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (1) Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; (iv) Non-tariff border measures; (b ) Import quotas: paragraph 25, page 32: 
 The Secretariat report states that "[u]nused quota entitlements are non-transferable and cannot 
be carried over to the next period.  Additionally, the Government does not reallocate any unused quotas."  
15. Could Japan describe the penalties, if any, th at it imposes on quota holders that fail to 
use their quota entitlements in a given year? 
 
RESPONSE 
METI does not allocate import quota to those importers who failed to import more than 80% of 
their allocation in the previous year.  
16. Does Japan have return policies for its ta riff quotas whereby quota holders may return 
unused quota for use by other importers before the end of the year? 
 
RESPONSE 
Japan does not have such a system whereby im port quota holders return their unused quota for 
the use by other importers. 
 
17. Could Japan expand on the tariff quota rules a nd/or policies it has in place to favour full 
use of the quotas? 
 RESPONSE 
METI does not allocate import quota to those importers who failed to import more than 80% of 
their allocation in the previous year.  
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (1) Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports; (v) State trading: paragraph 27, page 32: 
 The Secretariat’s Report states that prices of commodities under state trading activities tend to 
be higher than world prices, generally because  these activities are underpinned by legislated 
import or export rights and, in some cases, by specific monopoly rights over domestic production and distribution. 
 
18. Japan maintains state-trading enterprises fo r several products, including leaf tobacco, 
opium, rice, wheat and barley, and milk products. Can Japan please give additional 
information surrounding the operation of  the state-trading enterprises with 
responsibilities for wheat and barley, specifically:   
 
a. Do domestic producers of wheat and barley sell their production through the 
Government via a state-trading enterprise, or can these products be sold directly to processors? Are there specific monopoly rights over production and distribution for these products? Is so, please describe. 
RESPONSE 
Domestic wheat and barley are sold to pr ocessors directly from producers. There are no 
monopoly rights over production and distribution for these products.  
b. Please describe the factors and considera tions used to determine the domestic 
prices for wheat and barley.  
 
RESPONSE Prices of domestic wheat and barley are determin ed in deals between producers and processors.    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 97 
 
 
 c. Which other entities, other than notified STE’s have specific monopoly rights 
granted by the Government of Japan regarding agricultural products?   
 
RESPONSE 
There are no such entities other than notified. 
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measures: (vii) Government Procurement: 
paragraph 32, page 33, and  
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measures: (vii) Government Procurement: 
paragraph 42, page 35:  
The Secretariat’s Report states that government  procurement is also used in Japan as an 
instrument of industrial policy for some sectors and to support SMEs.  
19. Does Japan have a definition of “SME”?  If  so please provide the definition as well as 
how it applies in the context of domestic procurement at the central and prefecture 
level? 
 
RESPONSE 
The definition of SMEs in Japan is stipulated  in Article 2 of the Small and Medium-sized 
Enterprise Basic Act: 
http://www.chusho.meti.go.jp/sme _english/outline/08/01_01.html  
 
Under the Act on Ensuring the Receipt of Orde rs from the Government and Other Public 
Agencies by Small and Medium-sized Enterprise,  government at the central and government 
level and other public agencies endeavor to e xpand opportunities for SMEs to receive orders 
from the government and public agencies, by wa y of, inter alia, providing information on 
procurements.  
20. Can Japan list any specific central and prefectural government programs and policies in 
support of SMEs?  
 
RESPONSE 
A. Central and prefectural governments are requ ested to expand opportunities for SMEs based 
on the policies and measures such as: 
・Arrangement for SMEs in the affected areas by the Great East Japan Earthquake 
・Ensuring provision of informa tion on government procurement 
・Considering on the features of SMEs 
・Encouraging prevention of anti-dumping measures 
 
21. Can Japan provide a list of sectors where government procurement provides support to 
SMEs? 
 
RESPONSE 
Japan does not provide support to  SMEs in specific sectors. 
 
22. Can non-Japanese SMEs take advantage of these programs and policies?  
 
RESPONSE 
Non-Japanese SMEs can take advantage of these programs and policies. 
 
23. Can Japan confirm whether it imposes a mone tary value below which a procurement 
contract is automatically set aside for Japanese SMEs? WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 98 
 
 
 RESPONSE 
Japan does not set aside procurement contract for Japanese SMEs.  
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measures: (vii) Government Procurement: 
paragraph 36, page 34:  
The Secretariat’s Report specifies that companies pa rticipating in tenders need to satisfy certain 
criteria by the time a winning bidder is decided.  
24. Could Japan clarify what “certain criteria” are? 
25. Could Japan provide the list of such criteri a or links to relevant websites listing the 
criteria?  
 
RESPONSE 
The criteria vary in different procurements. Ma ny examples can be found in procurement plans 
published in the Official Gazette for government procurement. 
 Website for the Official Gazette:  http://kanpou.npb.go.jp/  
 
26. Are such criteria applied to specific industry sectors?  
 
RESPONSE 
The criteria do not apply to specific industry sectors but apply to suppliers who wish to 
participate in the tendering. 
 
27. What entity or authority is responsible for assessing conformity with any stated criteria? 
 
RESPONSE 
Procuring entities of the procurements are responsible for assessing conformity.  
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practises by Measu re: (1) Measures directly affecting imports; 
(vii) Government Procurement: paragraph 39, page 35: 
 
The Secretariat’s Report states that The Act fo r the Promotion of Use of Wood in Public 
Buildings, issued on 19 May 2010, promotes the use of wood in the construction of public 
buildings. The Secretariat’s report also notes that  “the authorities maintain that the law is 
operated without distinction betw een domestic and imported goods.” 
 
28. Is the law operated without distinction be tween domestic and imported goods by both 
central and prefectural governments?  
 RESPONSE 
The aim of the “The Act for the Promotion of Use of Wood in Public Buildings” is to boost the 
use of wood in public buildings, regardless of its country of origin. The Act is implemented in 
accordance with this principle.  
29. Can Japan provide assurances that the appli cation of this law does not discriminate 
against imported wood products?  
 
RESPONSE 
The Act for the Promotion of Use of Wood in Public Buildings requires the Government of 
Japan to establish “The Basic Policy”, on the basi s of which prefectures make their plan for the 
use of wood.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 99 
 
 
 This Basic Policy clearly stipulates that, in pr omoting use of wood in public buildings, the 
central and prefectural governments should en sure consistency with WTO rules and not 
introduce unnecessary barriers to the international trade.  
 
30. Could Japan list central and prefectural government programs and policies implemented 
with respect to The Act for the Promotion of Use of Wood in Public Buildings? 
 
RESPONSE 
Example of the program is as follows:  http://www.rinya.maff.go.jp/j/riyou /koukyou/pdf/suishinkeikaku.pdf  
 
31. Could Japan provide details on how certifi cation of wood is c onducted and provide 
estimates on the proportion of foreign wood used in the construction of public buildings? 
 RESPONSE 
There is no process of “certification of wood” under the Act for the Promotion of Use of Wood 
in Public Buildings. The act is implemented w ithout distinction between domestic and imported 
wood, and there is no data such as the share of pr oducts used in public buildings with respect to 
their country of origin. 
 
32. Are there subsidy programs available in this sector? If so, what are the eligibility 
criteria? 
 
RESPONSE 
Some subsidy programs are available for buildi ng of and decoration of interior of public 
buildings in woods. The eligibility criteria for th e subsidy programs are that the buildings are 
used for public purposes.  
 
33. Can Japan provide additional details on how it ensures that the law operates “without 
distinction between domestic and imported goods”? 
 RESPONSE 
Please refer to the answer to Q29. The central  government instructs prefectural governments to 
implement them in accordance with WTO rules.  The Government of Japan has not been 
informed of any cases of prefectural governments being not complying with the law.  
 Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (vii) Government Procurement: 
paragraph 40, page 35:  
The Secretariat’s Report notes that in accordan ce with the Basic Guideline for Public 
Procurement of Information Systems (March  2007), where Information Systems contracts 
“affecting a design or development is estimated to be not less than ¥500 million, it must be 
divided”.  The Report also explains that govern ment organizations are required to formulate 
procurement plans.  
34. Could Japan please explain the rationale for di viding a procurement under this guideline 
and explain how the procurements are divided?  Is the division of procurement specified 
in the tender documentation?  
 
RESPONSE to 34 and 36 
The purpose of “divided procurement” is to im prove competition in procurement of large-scale 
information systems, such as by preventi ng a vender lock-in of the procurement.  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 100 
 
 
 Specifically, procurement is divided when the valu e of procurement is estimated to be not less 
than 500 million JPY. The procuring entity is required to divide the procurement into 
appropriate and reasonable units such as “procure ment of design/development of the system” or 
“procurement of operation of the system,” so that not only specific suppliers but more other 
suppliers would be able to par ticipate in tenders in order to  secure sufficient competitiveness. 
 These rules are stipulated in the Basic Guideline on the Government Procurement of IT system. Division of procurement is not described in tender documentation, but specified in the 
procurement plans. 
 
35. Can Japan explain how this requirement conforms to its obligations under the 
Government Procurement Agreement (GPA ), notably Article II on Valuation of 
Contracts? 
 
RESPONSE 
The purpose of “divided procurement” is to im prove competition in procurement of large-scale 
information systems, such as by preventi ng a vender lock-in of the procurement. 
 Specifically, procurement is divided when the valu e of procurement is estimated to be not less 
than 500 million JPY. The procuring entity is required to divide the procurement into 
appropriate and reasonable units such as “procure ment of design/development of the system” or 
“procurement of operation of the system,” so that not only specific suppliers but more other 
suppliers would be able to par ticipate in tenders in order to  secure sufficient competitiveness. 
 Therefore, it does not contradict to article II of the GPA which prohibits the division of 
procurement with the intention of avoi ding the application of the Agreement. 
 
36. With respect to procurement plans, are ther e any specific guidelines for such division? 
 
37. Are these procurement plans publicized? If yes, could Japan provide the relevant 
documentation? 
 
RESPONSE 
Procurement plans of ministries are published on  the web site of each ministry. Anyone can 
download them from the web sites.  
[For example: Website of the Ministry of In ternal Affairs and Communications (in Japanese 
only)] http://www.soumu.go.jp/menu_sinsei/cyoutatsu/joho_system.html  
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (vii) Government Procurement: 
paragraph 41, page 35: 
 
The Secretariat’s Report states that for forei gn suppliers, a central-government-wide unified 
qualification could be granted for participa ting in tendering contracts for, inter alia, 
manufacturing, sales of products, and offers of servi ce. It also states that 77,592 firms (of which 
264 were either wholly or partially owned by foreigners) have this qualification. 
38. Could Japan define what is a “central-gove rnment-wide unified qualification” and how 
it is used?  
 
RESPONSE 
In the domestic law, it is provided that each mi nistry can establish qualification requirement to 
the person who is going to participate in the te ndering according to the kind of contract and the 
amount of money.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 101 
 
 
 “Unified qualification” is used as common standa rds of qualifications by all central government 
Ministries for the qualification of tender participants in manufacturing, sales of products, and offers of the services and purchase of the goods. A qualification obtained from one ministry is 
automatically valid at all other central ministries, therefore, the unified qualification reduces 
burden on applicants. 
 Each applicant is granted one of the four classes,  A through D, based on the quantification of 
yearly average production or sales, total of owne d capital, floating capital ratio, the number of 
years in business, value of facilities. An applican t can participate in a tendering by showing the 
granted class which is required in the tender notice. 
 
39. Are foreign suppliers required to obtain this qualification to participate in tendering 
contracts for manufacturing, sales of products, and offers of services? What is the process to obtain the qualification?  
 RESPONSE 
Foreign suppliers are also required to obtain this  qualification to participate in tendering for 
manufacturing, sales of products, and offers of services.  
In order to obtain the qualification, suppliers n eed to apply with attached sheets (Certificate of 
registered matters or other equivalent documents,  tax payment certification or other equivalent 
documents, financial statements, and resume of operation), at the windows of each Ministries or 
on the Internet.  
40. Why are such qualifications deemed neces sary? Are entities required to only accept 
foreign bids based on this qualification scheme? 
 
RESPONSE 
The purpose of the qualification of tender particip ants is to ensure proper fulfillment of the 
contract by the successful bidder.  
In the domestic law, it is provided that each mi nistry can establish qualification requirement to 
the person who is going to participate in the te ndering according to the kind and the value of the 
contract.  “Unified qualification” is used as common standa rds of qualifications by all central government 
Ministries for the qualification of tender participants in manufacturing, sales of products, and 
offers of the services and purchase of the goods. A qualification obtained from one ministry is 
valid automatically at all other central ministries, therefore, the unified qualification reduces burden on applicants.   Entities accept all bids based on this qualifi cation, regardless of the nationality. 
 
41. What are the eligibility criteria used to determine a central-government wide unified 
qualification?  Are the criteria the same for domestic suppliers? 
 
RESPONSE 
Entities are classified into A ~ D classes by quantifying their yearly  average production or sales, 
the total of owned capital, floating capital ratio , the number of years in business, value of 
facilities (only in case of qualification for manufacturing). The value of the quantification and the classes are published.  
The same criteria are applied to the domestic suppliers as well. 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 102 
 
 
 42. Is there a registry of “central-government-w ide unified qualified” suppliers? If so, how 
often is this list created and for what period of time is the qualification granted? 
 
RESPONSE 
There is a registry of “central-government-wid e unified qualification”  and updated on a daily 
basis. The qualification is granted for a period of 3 years (Current period: April 1, 2010 to March 31, 2013. Next period: from April 1, 20 13 to March 31, 2016). The qualification can be 
granted at any point of the 3-year-period, but th e expiration date of the qualification will be the 
last day of the each period. (For example, currently (as of February 2013) obtained 
qualifications expire on March 3, 2013. Those qua lifications obtained between April 1, 2013 
and March 31, 2016 will ex pire on March 31, 2016). 
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (vii) Government Procurement: 
paragraph 43, page 36: 
 The Secretariat’s Report indicates the Act for Promoting Proper Tenderi ng and Contracting for 
Public Works defines major policy instruments for preventing bid rigging and other improper actions. 
 43. Could Japan provide a detailed descripti on of the new measures adopted against 
bid-rigging related to public works by the Act? 
 
RESPONSE 
Guideline principles on the Measures for Proper Tendering and Contrac ting for Public Works 
and Notification based on the Guidelin e have been adopted by the Act. 
 
(1) Guiding Principles on the M easures for Proper Tendering and Contracting for Public Works 
(http://www.mlit.go.jp/common/000164925.pdf ) (in Japanese only) 
II Measures for appropriate tendering and contracting 
1. Measures mainly to maintain the transp arency of the process of tendering and 
contracting and the contents of contracts 
2. Measures mainly to encourage fair competitions among the participants of tendering 
and the contractors 3. Measures mainly to prevent bid-riggi ng and other improper actions from tendering 
and contracting 
(2) Notification dated August 25 
(http://www.mlit.go.jp/common/000164392.pdf  ) (in Japanese only) 
 I.3. Review of the prior announcement of estimated price, etc. 
I.8. Prevention of the commitment of procuring entities in bid-rigging and other improper actions 
II.3. Proper enforcement of measures includi ng the suspension from the eligibility for 
participation in tendering 
 
44. Can complaints in bidding procedures only be made to the Office for Government 
Procurement Challenge System (CHANS)? 
 
RESPONSE 
In addition to CHANS, a statement may be perfo rmed at a court. Under CHANS system, the 
Government Procurement Review Board reviews co mplaints filed with respect to procurement 
by the central government entities and other cen tral government-related entities (i.e. Annex 3 
entities of the GPA). Each sub-central government (prefectures and ordinance-designated cities) 
has equivalent procedure to CHANS. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 103 
 
 
 45. Are there any restrictions on who can bri ng a complaint to CHANS? For example, can 
foreign suppliers register complaints through CHANS? 
 
RESPONSE 
Any supplier, regardless of its nationa lity, can bring a complaint to CHANS. 
 
46. Can CHANS rescind a contract (e.g. are injunctions possible)? 
 
RESPONSE 
Where the Government Procurement Review Board finds as a result of the reviewing of a 
complaint that any measures under the GPA or ot her relevant rules on government procurement 
are not implemented, the Board can make a r ecommendation including that on  cancellation of 
the contract. Designation of Applicable M easures Concerning Government Procurement 
(Decision by the Office of Government Procur ement Review) specifies that “the Procuring 
Entity shall, in principle, and as its own decision, duly follow the recommendations of the 
Board on any complaints brought appropriately before the Board. 
 
47. Are CHANS decisions binding and does CHANS provide for compensation? 
 
RESPONSE 
Designation of Applicable Measures Concerni ng Government Procurement (Decision by the 
Office of Government Procurement Review) spec ifies that “The Procuring Entity shall, in 
principle, and as its own decision, duly follow the recommendations of the Government Procurement Review Board on any complaints brou ght appropriately before the Board,” thus its 
decisions are not legally binding.  CHANS does not provide for compensation. 
 
48. What is the relationship between the Gove rnment Procurement Review Board (GPRB) 
and the CHANS system?  Are either of the two bodies part of the judicial system? 
 
RESPONSE 
CHANS is the system which receives and processes specific complaints concerning government procurement of goods and services (including  construction services), to ensure greater 
transparency, fairness, and co mpetitiveness in the government procurement system. The GPRB 
is the review body under the CHANS system. Both are not judicial system.  CHANS: 
http://www5.cao.go.jp/access/e nglish/chans_main_e.html 
Government Procurement Review Body: http://www5.cao.go.jp/access/english/chans_board_e.html 
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Meas ure: (viii) Standards, Technical regulations 
and phytosanitary measures: paragraph 44, page 37, and paragraph 46 to 47, page 38: 
 
The Secretariat’s Report states that technical re gulations and conformity assessment procedures 
are applied through various laws and regulations, including the Pharmaceutical Affairs Law, the 
Industrial Standardization Law, and the Law Concerning Standardization and Proper Labeling 
of Agricultural and Forestry Products (JAS Law). 
 
49. What is the procedure for foreign suppliers to obtain the necessary labeling for Forestry 
Products? Are these procedures to obtain labeling in Forestry Products required in order 
to participate in government procurement? 
 
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 104 
 
 
 RESPONSE 
If foreign suppliers would like to attach JAS l ogos based on JAS standards, those suppliers have 
to be certified by the Registered Domestic/Overseas Certifying Bodies. The list of the Registered Domestic/Overseas Certifying Bodies is available on the following 
MAFF’s website. 
http://www.maff.go.jp/j/jas/jas_kikaku/kikan_itiran.html  
 
Obtaining labeling in Forestry Products is not required in order to participate in government 
procurement. 
 
50. Where can suppliers obtain the standard s criteria for products used in wood 
construction? How are these standards determined? 
 
RESPONSE 
The JAS standards for wood products are available on the following website of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. 
http://www.maff.go.jp/j/jas/jas_kikaku/kikaku_itiran.html  
 
Regarding the JAS standards for plywood and glue d laminated timber, the English versions are 
available on the following website of the Inco rporated Administrativ e Agency Food and 
Agricultural Materials Inspection Center. 
http://www.famic.go.jp/english/jas.html  
 
In accordance with the JAS Law, the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry an d Fisheries establishes, 
revises and abolishes JAS standards after consid eration by the Original Proposal Preparation 
Committees established in the Original Proposal Preparation Body and adoption by the Council 
for the Standards for Agricultu ral and Forestry Products. 
 
51. Can Japan explain when the “operational safety clause” is applied to procurement 
contracts? Is it only applied to ground transportation? 
 RESPONSE 
It is applied when it is appropriately decided that the procurement of goods and/or services 
concerns operational safety of transportation taking  into consideration the characteristics of the 
procurement. It is only applied to ground transportation.  
52. Since the WTO agreements, including th e WTO GPA, recognizes the right for a 
contract entity to apply a technical specif ication necessary to meet certain performance 
objectives of a project (such as safety) can Japan explain why this needs to be a derogation of all GPA obligations such as non-discrimination in its WTO GPA market access schedule? 
 RESPONSE 
Japan’s commitment under the GPA,  including the Notes to its Annexes, is a result of the 
negotiations with other GPA Parties, taki ng into consideration various factors. 
 
53. What entity is responsible for verifying compliance of contracting entities with the 
operational safety clause? Are there reports of compliance and are such reports publicly 
available? Does MLIT play any role in ove rseeing the application of the clause with 
Japanese Railway entities? 
 
RESPONSE 
The Government is responsible for the compliance of operational safety clause of the relevant 
entities. The Government requires the entities stri ct application of the clause and consultation   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 105 
 
 
 with the relevant authority in advance when ques tions arise in deciding on the application of the 
clause.  There is no report on the compliance of safety clause. 
 
54. Canada notes with interest Japan's efforts to  align its national standards with relevant 
international standards.  In this regard, Ca nada would be interested in knowing what 
criteria Japan may use in order to determine wh en to align to an international standard. 
 RESPONSE 
As an example, in the case of Japanese Industrial St andards (JIS), Japan may give preference to 
selecting the following fields in order to harmonize with international standards: 1) Concerning safety and security 2) Concerning products which are distributed globally 3) High demand from users 
4) High demand from regulators 
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Meas ure: (viii) Standards, Technical regulations 
and phytosanitary measures:  paragraph 49, page 38: 
 
55. According to Table III.5, as of 2011, 46 of Japan’s safety regulations for motor vehicles 
are considered to be equivalent to interna tional standards. Can Japan confirm how many 
of these correspond to UNECE regulations (1958 Agreement) or Global Technical Regulations (1998 Agreement)?  
 RESPONSE 
As indicated in Table III.5, as of 2011, 39 (46%) of Japan’s safety regulations for motor 
vehicles are considered to be equivalent to in ternational standards and all of these 39 items 
correspond to UNECE regulations.  
56. For those remaining Japanese safety standards not corresponding to or equivalent to 
international standards, is it Japan’s in tention to align these with UNECE safety 
regulations? Would this also include envi ronmental regulations for motor vehicles? 
 
RESPONSE 
With regard to regulations for road vehicl es, since acceding to the Agreement on Uniform 
Technical Prescriptions for Vehicles (the 1958 Agreement), aimed at disseminating safer and 
more environmentally-friendly vehicle regulations  and promoting more efficient international 
distribution of vehicle parts and equipment, Jap an has been actively wo rking in line with the 
Agreement including the international harmonizat ion of regulations. Japan intends to apply 
UNECE regulations in accordance with its prior ities, taking into account such elements as 
domestic and international requests, the impact  on safety and the environment, the economic 
ramifications of harmonization, etc.  To achieve  this, Japan will work actively to promote the 
application of UNECE regulations, including en vironmental regulations , while, as appropriate, 
proposing necessary amendments to those regulati ons at the World Forum for Harmonization of 
Vehicle Regulations under the UNECE to reflect the traffic situation in Japan.  
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (1) Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports (viii) Standards, technical regulations  and phytosanitary measures: paragraph 55, 
page 41: 
 
57. With respect to Japan’s new safety regulati ons for road vehicles, could Japan provide 
more information with respect to which safety standards they have chosen to align with WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 106 
 
 
 UNECE Standards and which remain specific to Japanese regulations? Is Japan 
planning to fully align with UNECE Standards and the 1958 Agreement? 
 
RESPONSE 
As of 10 January 2013, Japan has applied 43 of the UNECE Regulations under the 1958 
Agreement. The status of the 1958 Agreement and of the annexed regulations can be viewed at 
the website of the World Forum for Harmoniza tion of Vehicle Regulations under the UNECE 
(http://www.unece.org/trans/main/wp29/wp29wgs /wp29gen/wp29fdocstts.html). Japan will 
work actively to promote the application of UNECE regulations while, as appropriate, 
proposing necessary amendments to those regulati ons at the World Forum for Harmonization of 
Vehicle Regulations under the UNECE to reflect the traffic situation in Japan.  
 
58. What type of certification and testing regime  does Japan use with respect to certification 
of road vehicles? Are vehicles required to be tested in Japan? 
 RESPONSE 
The Motor Vehicle Type Designation System and the Preferential Handling Procedure for 
Imported Motor Vehicles are used.  The type certification system is a system whereby the government assures that every motor 
vehicle complies with technical standards concerni ng the safety, environment, etc. before motor 
vehicles are put on sale. Motor vehicle manufactur ers, etc. make applications, etc. to the 
Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism before they can produce or sell a new type of motor vehicle, and afterwards, concer ning the motor vehicle for which the application 
was submitted, examinations are conducted to determine whether the vehicle conforms to 
various applicable regulations, including the Sa fety Regulation for Road Transport Vehicles 
before it is designated or approved.  (1) Outline of the System [1] Type Designation System This is a system to designate, upon application,  the type of vehicles that are mass-produced and 
have identical construction, devices and perfo rmance. To undergo the examination for type 
designation, documents and the actual motor vehicle shall be presented to the following 
authorities:  1) the Automobile Type Approval Test Depa rtment of the National Traffic Safety and 
Environment Laboratory 
* to check the conformity of the motor vehicle w ith regard to the Safety Regulations, etc. (the 
vehicle’s specifications, body strength, functi ons of each device, emission volumes and noise 
level); and 2) the Type Approval and Recall Division of the Road Transport Bureau of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism * to check the uniformity of motor vehicles (quality control systems at the production stage), 
and 
* to examine the system of motor vehicle completion inspections, etc.  After the examination is completed and the moto r vehicle is type-designated, presentation of the 
vehicle can be omitted during the initial inspecti on conducted at the Transport Branch Office, 
etc., provided that the completion inspection certificate issued by the motor vehicle 
manufacturer, etc. is submitted.  The feature of this System is the simplification of vehicle registration procedures by omitting the process of presenting the individual motor vehicle concerned to the Ministry of Land, 
Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism and allowing the motor vehicle manufacturers concerned   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 107 
 
 
 to conduct the initial inspection of the vehicle on behalf of the Minister of Land, Infrastructure, 
Transport and Tourism who originally should perform such inspection.  Furthermore, in the case of imported motor vehicles, vehicles can undergo a preliminary 
examination prior to the application for motor vehicle type designation, etc. For the purpose of 
assuring proper and efficient certification affa irs for imported motor vehicles, inspection 
officials of the National Traffic Safety and Envi ronment Laboratory are dispatched to overseas 
motor vehicle manufacturers upon receiving appli cation so that the inspection officials may 
conduct examination in advance to use the results  of this preliminary examination during the 
examination of vehicle type designation in Japan. Under this system, it is not necessary for the 
import business operators to bring in the motor vehicles concerned only for the purpose of being 
examined.  This Type Designation System has been utili zed fully for those types of domestic motor 
vehicles as well as of foreign motor vehicles that  are sold in large qua ntities in the Japanese 
market. 
 [2] Preferential Handling Procedure System [PHP] This System is provided for promotion of the impor t of motor vehicles. The system is applied to 
types of imported motor vehicles that are sold in  small quantities (2,000 units per year per type, 
or 3000 units if the type will be eventually sh ifted to the type designation) in the Japanese 
market.  Examinations are carried out on the conformity to the safety regulations by the Automobile 
Type Approval Test Division of the National Traffic Safety and Environment Laboratory, and 
on the appropriateness of the operation system of quality control by the Type Approval and 
Recall Division of Road Transport Bureau of Mi nistry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and 
Tourism, solely using the relevant documents.  In this system, the documents to be attached along with the application for notification have 
been significantly simplified and the time re quired for examination has been reduced. 
Furthermore, there is no need for presenting motor vehicles for the purpose of examination. 
Hence, this system is used for motor vehi cles with a considerably small sales quantity. 
Nevertheless, it is still necessary to present individual motor vehicles during the initial inspection conducted at the Transport Branch Office, etc.  Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (1) Measures Directly Affecting Imports (viii) Standards, technical regulations  and phytosanitary measures: paragraph 59, 
page 41: 
 
The (TBT section of the) Secretariat report menti ons that Japan recognized a number of foreign 
conformity assessment bodies (CABs) in a number of sectors. It also mentions that Japan 
recognized a number of foreign CABs in the tel ecommunications sector pursuant to MRAs with 
some of its trade partners. However, this secti on indicates it that Japan has not recognized a single 
foreign-based CAB in the area of medical devices.  
59. Where MRAs are not in place, in order to be recognized in Japan, do foreign CABs 
need to be accredited by a Japanese accreditation body or do Japan authorities recognize 
accreditation by a signatory to the ILAC and IAF MLAs? 
 
RESPONSE 
In Japan, any CABs (i.e. both domestic and fo reign CABs) are required to be accredited by a 
Japanese accreditation body or government, since it is necessary to ensure that CABs meet a WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 108 
 
 
 certain quality and lists of accredited CABs are publ ished from the viewpoint of transparency to 
stakeholders.  
60. Are there any sectors in which Japan requires that CABs be physically or legally 
established in Japan in order to be recogni zed? If so, please provide a list of such sectors. 
 
RESPONSE 
Yes, the medical device sector falls under this category. 
 
61. Would Japan consider recognizing a foreign CA B in the area of medical devices if such 
a CAB applied for recognition? If not, why not? If yes, please explain the requirements 
which would apply, including whether an MR A would need to be negotiated with the 
country where the CAB is established in order for Japan to consider recognizing such a CAB. 
 RESPONSE 
Quality assurance and post market safety manageme nt is particularly important for the medical 
device sector. Therefore it is required that qualif ied Japanese “Marketing Authorization Holders 
(MAHs)” get approvals/certifications, market products and take full responsibility for post 
market quality/safety issues in Japan. Thus, in orde r to appropriately contact and supervise these 
MAHs, certification bodies need to have offices in Japan. 
 
However, regarding audits for foreign manufact uring sites, utilizing external auditors or 
outsourcing to other certification bodies in accordance with ISO/IEC 17021 is allowed. Therefore most foreign affiliated certification bodies are working with foreign headquarters/branches to conduct audits efficiently. 
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (1) Measures Directly Affecting 
Imports (viii) Standards, technical regulations  and phytosanitary measures: paragraph 67, 
page 44: 
 
62. Does Japan require that MRAs be negotiate d as a pre-condition to recognizing foreign 
CABs in the radio and terminal telecommunications equipment sector? 
 
RESPONSE 
Japan does not require that MRAs be negotiate d as a pre-condition to recognizing foreign CABs. 
Also, Japan is able to recognize foreign CABs on the basis of the Radio Act and 
Telecommunications Business Act. 
 
63. Are there any other sectors in which Japan requires MRAs as a pre-condition to 
recognizing foreign CABs? If so, please provide a list of sectors in which such requirements apply. 
 
RESPONSE In Japan, there is no sector that requires the MRA as a pre-condition to recognize foreign CABs.  
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (1) Measures Directly Affecting Imports (viii) Standards, technical regulatio ns and phytosanitary measures: Conformity 
Assessment: paragraph 68, page 44:  
64. Where MRAs are not in place, beyond accreditation, are the requirements and procedures 
applicable to recognition of foreign CABs the same as those applicable to domestic CABs? 
If not, what are the differences? 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 109 
 
 
 RESPONSE 
The requirements and procedures for recogniti on of CABs are the same for domestic and 
foreign CABs.  Part III. Trade Policies and Practises by Measure: (3) Measures Directly 
Affecting Production and Trade; (iv) Intell ectual Property Rights: paragraph 125, page 
57: 
65. Please explain how Japan is addressing the four priorities as identified in its 2011 
National IP Strategic Program to develop Japan's network society from the IP 
perspective and what progress has been made to date? 
 
RESPONSE 
In relation to the four target indicators descr ibed in paragraph 125, Japan selected “digital 
contents”, which includes cloud-computing and di gital media service, as one of the strategic 
fields in the area of international standardiza tion, and developed the specific strategy in the 
related fields in 2010 (This information is d escribed in the “Intellectual Property Strategic 
Program 2010”). However, this strategy is confidenti al since it is strongly related to the interest 
of relevant entities in Japan.  In addition, Japan adopted the “Intellectual Property Strategic Program 2011” in 2011, which 
includes 4 strategies that support new attempts in the “Globally Networked Age”, and their 
details are as follows:   The first strategy is “the Stage-up Strategy  for International Standardization”. Among the 
increasingly fierce competition over the “intelligen ce to use intelligence,” the ongoing “defeat 
in business despite victory in technology” must e nd. This requires companies to take advantage 
of international standardization in order to increase their competitiveness through alliances with 
external organizations. Competitiveness shall be strengthened by steadily executing and 
continuously verifying international standardiza tion strategy in seven designated strategic areas. 
In addition, the experience and lessons learne d from the Great East Japan Earthquake will be 
appropriately applied to international standards. 
 
The second strategy is “the Competitive Strategy  for IP Innovation”. Emer gency relief measures 
for the Great East Japan Earthquake and other a ppropriate measures will be  promptly taken. The 
intellectual property system that becomes the core of the innovation system must be improved to make it globally appealing, thereby attr acting advanced technologies and skilled human 
capital from around the world and encouraging innovation. It is also important to develop the 
infrastructure for promoting the use of intelligen ce for commercialization and industrialization.  
 The third strategy is “the Cutting-edge Di gital Network Strategy”. The deepening and 
development of digital networks are creati ng new business opportunities, such as electronic 
books and cloud computing. Strategy and infrastru cture must therefore be developed for the 
competition over advanced digital networks th at become extremely important in crisis 
management in case of major disasters.   The fourth strategy is “the Cool Japan strate gy”. Asian countries and other global markets are 
sources of growth, and Japan must make globally competitive Cool Japan a driving force for its 
new development. To this end, it is important to establish a virtuous cycle comprising the 
discovery of intellectual assets that lay buried in  various regions, creation of other intellectual 
assets, global promotion of such assets, and popularization of them while also developing the infrastructure. Cool Japan will also play a sign ificant role in the country’s future creative 
reconstruction efforts in the wake of the Gr eat East Japan Earthquake. The current harsh 
conditions make it even more necessary to ac tively promote Cool Japan in a public-private WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 110 
 
 
 partnership through appropriate information dist ributed both inside and outside the country, so 
that Japan can rebuild itself and return to  world prominence using intellectual assets. 
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practises by Measure: (3) Measures Directly 
Affecting Production and Trade; (iv) In tellectual Property Rights: paragraph 127, 
page 57:  
  
66. How does Japan's innovation strategy improve its  patent system and make it more user 
friendly? 
 
RESPONSE 
From the perspective of enhancing Japan ese competitiveness through innovation, Japan 
understands that it is important to ensure appr opriate protection and utilization of patents and 
increase attractiveness of acquiring patent rights for users such as companies. Furthermore, 
Japan has been taking successive measures based on this perspective such as the amendment of 
the Patent Act in 2011 to promote innovation, as stated in paragraph 81 of the report by 
Government of Japan (WT/TPR/S/276).  
Part IV. Intellectual Property Rights: Japan's Domestic Policies: (3) Intellectual Property 
Rights; (c) industrial property ri ghts: paragraph 128, page 57:  
  
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 July 2011.  
67. What other laws and policies does Japan have  in place to protect and sustain Japanese 
culture domestically? 
 
RESPONSE 
In November 2001, the Fundamental Law for th e Promotion of Culture and the Arts was 
adopted. Based on this law, Japan inclusively promotes the policy concerning promotion of 
culture and art. 
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practises by Measure: (3) Measures Directly 
Affecting Production and Trade; (iv) Intellectual Property Rights: paragraph 130, page 58: 
 
68. What were the results of Japan's green-re lated accelerated patent prosecution pilot 
programme?  
 
RESPONSE 
Japan launched the green-related accelerated pa tent examination pilot program in November 
2009. The total number of requests for this pilot program amounts to about 700. The JPO issues 
the first office action within two months on av erage from the day when a request is filed.  
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practises by Measure: (3) Measures Directly 
Affecting Production and Trade; (iv) Intell ectual Property Rights: paragraph 136, page 
60: 
 
69. Does Japan provide for additional data prot ection for new indications in relation to 
its patent regime? 
 RESPONSE 
Japan does not provide for data protection in relation to the patent regime.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 111 
 
 
 70. Were any changes made to the scope of patentable subject matter or is the discussion 
still on-going at the JPO? 
 
RESPONSE 
No changes were made to the scope of patentab le subject matter during the review period. The 
JPO is not currently discussing above issue.  
71. Were there any changes made to opposition pr oceedings, particularly with respect to 
procedure? 
 
RESPONSE 
Since the opposition system was abolished and in tegrated into the invalidation trial system 
effective January 1, 2004, the opposition system is  not provided under the current patent system 
any more.  
For the recent changes made to the invalidati on trial system, please refer to pages 110-111 of 
the JPO Annual Report 2012 on the following website page: http://www.jpo.go.jp/cgi/linke.cgi?url=/shiryou_e /toushin_e/kenkyukai_e/ annual_report2012.ht
m 
 
72. Can Japan explain its patent/pharmaceutical  rules, especially the interface between 
patent rules and regulatory ap provals required for items to be marked or placed in 
formularies?  
 
RESPONSE 
(Patent Linkage) 
Any generic medicines are not the subject of a pproval where a valid patent on the API (Active 
Pharmaceutical Ingredient) prohibits the generic medicines from being manufactured. 
 (Patent Term Extensions) In the field of drug product, it takes a long time to  conduct testing and examinations etc. that are 
necessary for gaining the approva l under the Pharmaceutical Affa irs Law, which gives rise to 
the problem that inventors cannot enjoy the benefits  of the exclusive rights that they hold while 
such testing and examinations are being conducted.  The purpose of the system for patent term extens ions is to restore the period during which the 
patented invention was unable to be worked  because it was necessary to obtain an approval 
under the Pharmaceutical Affairs Law.  If there is a period during which a patented inve ntion is unable to be worked because it is 
necessary to obtain approvals under the Pharmaceutical  Affairs Law, the term of the patent right 
may be extended, upon application to register a pa tent term extension, by a period not exceeding 
five years. 
 Where the duration of a patent right is extended, such patent right shall not be effective against 
any act other than the working of the patented  invention for the product which was the subject 
of the approval under the Pharmaceutical A ffairs Law which constituted the reason for the 
registration of extension (where the specific usag e of the product is prescribed by the approval, 
the product used for that usage.)  (Provision on Experiment and Research) With regard to the patent/pharmaceutical rules, Patent Act Article 69 restricts the effect of 
patent rights as follows: WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 112 
 
 
 ・A patent right shall not be effective against the working of the patented invention for 
experimental or research purposes.(Article 69(1)) 
・A patent right for the invention of a medicine  (refers to a product used for the diagnosis, 
therapy, treatment or prevention of human disease s, hereinafter the same shall apply in this 
paragraph) to be manufactured by mixing two or  more medicines or for the invention of a 
process to manufacture a medicine by mixing two or more medicines shall not be effective against the act of preparation of a medicine as is written in a prescription from a physician or 
a dentist and the medicine prepared as is written in a prescription from a physician or a 
dentist.(Article 69(3)) 
 Part III. Trade Policies and Practises by Measure: (3) Measures Directly 
Affecting Production and Trade; (iv) Intellectual Property Rights: paragraph  156, page 
64: 
 
73. What exceptions and limitations did Japan legislate to facilitate use of copyrighted 
works over the Internet? 
 
RESPONSE 
In the amendments of the Copyright Act in 2009, the following provisions were newly 
stipulated to facilitate the exploitation of copyrighted works over the Internet; Article 47 
quinquies (reproduction for the prevention, etc. of a difficulty in transmission), Article 47 sexies 
(reproduction etc. for a retrieval, etc. of a di fficulty in transmitter identification code of 
information which has been made transmittabl e), Article 47 septies (reproduction, etc. for 
analyzing information), Article 47 octies (reproduc tion for exploitation of works which is based 
on a computer.)  Part III. Trade Policies and Practises by Measure: (3) Measures Directly 
Affecting Production and Trade; (iv) Intellectual Property Rights: paragraph 164, page 65: 
 
74. What other countries, in addition to China, were complaints received from during the IP 
Protection Office's consultations? 
 
RESPONSE 
Regarding Paragraph 163, the IP  Protection Office received cons ultations and requests from the 
domestic industry on IP infringement in South Korea, Indonesia and Viet Nam.  Part III. Trade Policies and Practises by Measure: (3) Measures Directly 
Affecting Production and Trade; (iv) Intellectual Property Rights: paragraph 164, page 65: 
 
75. Does Japan provide for ex parte (without notice) orders as part of its intellectual 
property civil enforcement regime? If not , can you explain the rationale for not 
providing such orders? 
 
RESPONSE 
The Code of Civil Procedure of Japan does not provide for ex parte  injunction, which is based 
solely on the petition of one party, in light of the necessity to ensure that a respondent has an 
opportunity to make an objection.  With regard to “an order of provisional dispos ition to determine a provisional status” prescribed 
in Article 23, paragraph (2) of the Civil Provi sional Remedies Act (hereinafter referred to as 
"the Act"), in principle, oral argument or a hear ing against an obligor shall be held because it   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 113 
 
 
 may have a serious impact on the obligor; exceptio nally, the Act provides that oral argument or 
a hearing against an obligor is not necessary onl y if there are circumstances where the objective 
of the petition for an order of provisional dispos ition cannot be achieved if such proceedings are 
held (Paragraph (4), Article 23 of the Act). 
 
As an administrative measure, right holders ma y lodge an application for suspension at 
Customs, of Intellectual Property Rights (hereina fter referred to as “IPR”) infringing goods. 
Once Customs suspends the goods which are suspect ed of being infringing IPR, they notify the 
right holder and the importer and identification pr ocedure is initiated to determine whether they 
are infringing IPR or not. When the goods are dete rmined to be infringing IPR, in principle, 
Customs confiscates and destroys them. 
 
76. What provisional measures does Japan have  in place for civil enforcement of 
intellectual property rights at the border? 
 
RESPONSE As an administrative measure, Japan Customs susp ends the goods, if they are suspected to be 
infringing IPRs in order to initiate the identif ication procedure to determine whether they are 
IPR infringing ones or not.  
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Meas ure: (3) Measures Affecting Production and 
Trade; (iv) Intellectual Property Rights; (f) International Cooperation and Harmonization: WIPO: paragraph 173, page 68: 
 
Japan signed the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable 
Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utiliza tion to the Convention on Biological Diversity on 
11 May 2011. 
 
77. Can Japan provide more information on th eir domestic implementation of the Nagoya 
Protocol? Which law or laws do (or will) these measures fall under? 
 RESPONSE 
As one of national targets, “The National Biodi versity Strategy of Japan 2012-2020” mentions 
that the Government of Japan “aims to ratif y the Nagoya Protocol as early as possible and 
implement domestic measures for this protocol by 2015 at the latest”.  
The Government of Japan is currently c onsidering the measures necessary for domestic 
implementation of the Nagoya Protocol, while  fully hearing the opinions of relevant 
stakeholders such as industry, academia and NGO/NPOs.  
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (1) Agricult ure; (i) Structure: paragraph 6, page 74: 
 
In 2010, the Government implemented a new single- year pilot direct-payment program on rice.  
The program provides participating farmers with income support to bridge the gap between the 
production cost and the "farm gate" price of rice,  irrespective of the size of farm.  In FY2011, 
the Government started to implement this progr am for rice. The program was also extended to 
other crops, such as wheat, barley, potatoes, buc kwheat, rapeseed, sugar beet, and soybeans by 
reorganizing the existing payment schemes for these crops. 
 
78. Could Japan describe how the direct pa yment program for the additional crops 
operates? For example, what are the e ligibility criteria and how is the payment 
determined?   
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 114 
 
 
 RESPONSE 
Support for products other than rice had already existed since before the 2010 introduction of 
payment for rice. (for details, please refer to  Japan's notifications up to 2009.) 
 
In 2011, those pre-existing payments were re grouped under a common umbrella program with 
the rice payments introduced in 2010, thereby reducing the administrative burden incurred by 
farmers. At that time, the eligibility criteria of  those pre-existing payments were relaxed to 
include all farmers who produce for the purpose of selling their products. (farmers who produce 
only for self-consumption are not eligible.) The r eason for including all farmers was so as not to 
suppress the potential of the small-scale but motivat ed farmers who intend to increase their farm 
size in the future.  
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (1) Agricu lture; (ii) Border measures: paragraph 9, 
page 75: 
 The report states that "Japan operates 18 tariff qu otas covering 175 tariff lines, mainly for dairy 
products and cereals (including rice), unchanged since 2011. The average fill ratio in 2010 was 
about 63.5% but varies from one quota to another, from a low of 10.6% for butter and butter oil to 99.3% for dairy products for general use (Table AIV.1)." Furthermore, the report states "There have been no changes to the administrati on of TRQs since the last Review of Japan." 
 
79. Could Japan explain the low fill rates from 2007 to 2010 for many of the tariff quotas 
presented in Table AIV.1 and indicate whet her Japan will make changes to its 
administration of tariff quotas as a consequence? 
 RESPONSE 
The underfill of TRQs for concerned products is mainly attribute to the decline of their domestic 
consumption related to these TRQs. Concerni ng unused quotas, a scheme of reallocation has 
been already implemented. 
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (1) Agricu lture; (ii) Border measures: paragraph 12, 
page 78: 
 
According to the Secretariat Report, Japan extended its provisions on emergency tariff measures 
for import surges of beef and pork in April 2011 and April 2012, respectively, for one year; the 
measures involve unilateral increases of customs duties to the WTO bound level (50% in case of 
beef) from the level reduced by Japan beyo nd its commitments (38.5% on beef). These 
measures are stipulated under the Temporary Customs Tariff Measures Law. During the period under review, Japan did not resort to emergency tariff measures for import surges of beef and 
pork.  
80. Could Japan please explain why the emergency tariff measures were extended when 
they were not used? Has Japan applied th ese emergency measures in the past? If so, 
when was it applied and for what period of time? 
 
RESPONSE 
The measures were the result of consultation with  concerned countries in the Uruguay Round as 
a safety net against decreasing applied tariff rat es below the bound level. As the applied tariff 
rates below the bound level were extended, the emergency tariff measures were also extended. 
The periods of time the measure were applied are as follows.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 115 
 
 
  
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (1) Agricult ure; (iii) Domestic measures: paragraph 15, 
page 78: 
 The Secretariat Report indicates that since 2011 there has been no change in price support 
schemes. Price support through the administered price scheme continues to apply for beef and 
pork. Under the scheme, the Agriculture and Livestock Industries Corporation buys from the market when wholesale prices fall below the “lower  stabilization price”, and releases stock into 
the market when wholesale prices exceed the “upper stabilization price.” 
 
81. Could Japan please provide additional information on the administered price scheme for 
beef and pork? What are the trigger prices for buying from the market and for releasing stock into the market, and how are they determined? 
 
RESPONSE The upper and the lower stabilization prices of be ef and pork are determined as the range of 
wholesale prices which cover production costs thro ugh a year taking into  consideration seasonal 
variation. In FY 2011 and FY  2012, the upper stabilization prices of beef and pork were 
1,060yen/kg and 545yen/kg, and the lower stab ilization prices were 815yen/kg and 400yen/kg, 
respectively.  
 Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (1) Agricult ure; (iii) Domestic measures: paragraph 15, 
page 78:  
The Secretariat Report notes that the government  provides calf producers with subsidies on a 
per head basis if the calf price falls below the “guaranteed base price”. In FY2011, the 
guaranteed base price was ¥310,000 per head for Japanese Black calf. 
 
82. The subsidy on a per head basis in US do llars is approximately $3,447. Could Japan 
please explain how it determined this amount of subsidy? What is the total value of this 
subsidy in FY2011? 
 
RESPONSE 
To ease the impact of liberalization of beef im ports in 1991, the guaranteed base price, which 
aims at guaranteeing reproduction of calves, is determined every year for each breed, based on 
the sales price of calves before the liberalizati on taking into consideration the change of 
economic situation thereafter. A subsidy per h ead fills the gap between the guaranteed base 
price and average sales price. In FY 2011,  the total payment for calf producers was 
5,835 million yen. 
 Fresh or chilled beef August 1, 2003 ～ March 31, 2004 
Frozen beef August 1, 1995 ～ March 31, 1996 
August 1, 1996 ～ March 31, 1997 
Pork November 1, 1995 ～ March 31, 1996 
July 1, 1996 ～ March 31, 1997 
April 1, 1997 ～ June 30, 1997 
August 1, 2001 ～ March 31, 2002 
August 1, 2002 ～ March 31, 2003 
August 1, 2003 ～ March 31, 2004 
August 1, 2004 ～ March 31, 2005 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 116 
 
 
 Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (1) Agricult ure; (iii) Domestic measures: paragraph 16, 
page 79:  
The Government implements "supply-demand ad justment" measures for rice, which sets a 
volume cap for production; domestic distributio n of rice is liberalized, and Government 
purchase and selling prices for rice are determined by tender. The Secretariat Report states that the supply-demand adjustment continues to be co nducted voluntarily by farmers and farmers' 
organizations.  
83. Could Japan please explain if there is regulatory oversight of the supply-demand 
adjustment implemented by farmers and farm ers’ organizations? Given that the “supply 
– demand adjustment” is conducted on a voluntary basis, is there a formal process for farmers and farm organizations to apply to  be part of the “supply-demand adjustment” 
initiative?  
 RESPONSE 
The supply-demand adjustment of rice is implem ented through collaboration of each level of 
government, farmers and fa rmers’ organizations. 
 Information on the target volume of rice productio n is transferred from MAFF to prefectures, 
from prefectures to municipalities, and from municipalities to farmers and farmers’ 
organizations. MAFF requires local councils, which consist of municipalities and Japan 
Agricultural Cooperatives, to report the progr ess of the implementation of supply-demand 
adjustment.  
The farmers and farmers’ organizations who wish to participate in the supply-demand 
adjustment are requested to s ubmit their implementation plans of rice production to the local 
council based on the allocated ta rget volume of the production. 
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (1) Agricult ure; (iii) Domestic measures: paragraph 19, 
page 79: 
 Payments for wheat, barley, and soybeans were replaced by the new payment scheme based on 
historical entitlement, introduced in 2007.  
84. Can Japan please provide additional informati on with regard to this program? Please 
provide details with regard to the criteria pertaining to historical entitlement? 
 
RESPONSE 
Up to 2010, it was required that the farm size be more than 4 ha (10 ha in Hokkaido prefecture) 
in the current year in order to receive  payments based on historical entitlement. 
 
In 2011, the requirement regarding farm size in the current year was abolished. All farmers who 
produce for the purpose of selling their products ar e now eligible for payments regardless of 
their farm size in the current year. (Farmers who produce only for self-consumption are not eligible.)  
Part IV. Trade Policy by Sector: (3) Manufacturing: paragraph 38, page 85:  
Japan mentions that the Enterprise Turnaroun d Initiative Corporation of Japan (ETIC) is 
authorized to provide financial support to co mpanies and businesses that are deemed to have 
revitalization potential, including in manufacturing.  
85. Could Japan please provide more information on the ETIC and the types of financial 
support provided?   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 117 
 
 
 RESPONSE 
The ETIC was established in October 2009 by th e Act on the Enterprise Turnaround Initiative 
Corporation of Japan. Its mission is to s upport the rehabilitation of solid middle-sized 
companies, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and others burdened by excess debt but 
that have valuable business resources. Larg e-scale businesses are basically excluded from 
eligibility for the ETIC support after the revisi on of the ETIC Act in March 2012. The ETIC 
was established as a temporary organization to  overcome difficult circumstances for local 
economies and provide support on a short-term basis.  
The ETIC has provided wide-ranging support for business rehabilitation, using such means as 
consultations, promoting the drawing-up of bus iness rehabilitation plans, arranging between 
businesses and creditors about restructuring lia bilities, financial supports, and providing 
specialized personnel. The financial supports include purchasing debts directly, conducting 
capital injection, loan financing and debt guarantee for borrowing money.  
The ETIC’s paid-in capital comprises invest ments from the Japanese government and those 
from private sector financial institutions. Funds for the ETIC’s business operations are procured 
from the market through government-guaranteed borrowing.  As a basic principle, in cases where creditors are re quested to forgive debt or take similar action 
in the course of business revitalization, manageme nt and shareholders of the subject company 
must accept corresponding responsibility.  
86. Also, could Japan please indicate which manufacturing sectors have benefited from 
such support? 
 
RESPONSE 
All business categories are eligible for suppor ts from the ETIC. Along with companies in 
various industries such as manufacturing, retail,  services, construction and transport, other 
entities such as hospitals and schools are also eligible.  
With regard to the manufacturing sectors, so far the ETIC has supported companies of the 
following industries:  
・Manufacture and sale of sports and training-related equipment 
・Automotive stamping tool and die operations 
・Automotive industry metal pressing and resin-type molding dies 
・General printing and digita l image processing services 
・Comprehensive product developm ent-related services, including manufacturing and sale of 
industrial design models 
・Development and sale of specialized lighting and original lighting, and import 
and sale of general lighting and interior products 
・Manufacture and sale of products and com ponents using decorative, processed or 
surface-treated aluminum 
・Outsourced manufacturer of soft drinks 
・Ship building, ship repair, and steel structure production 
 
Part IV. Trade Policy by Sector: (3) Manufacturing: paragraph 38, page 85: 
 
Japan mentions that the Innovation Network Corpor ation of Japan (INCJ) also aims to provide 
financial, technological and ma nagement support with a view to promoting the creation of 
“next-generation businesses”, including in manufacturing. 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 118 
 
 
 87. Could Japan please provide more information on the INCJ and the types of financial 
support provided? Also, could Japan please indicate which manufacturing sectors have benefited from such support?  
RESPONSE:  The INCJ provides basically financial support by investment. 
There is no limitation on its investment in terms of sectors. Until now, the INCJ has invested in various ar eas such as materials, chemicals, electronic 
devices, industrial machinery, energy, transpor tation, automobile, cons umer goods, retail, life 
sciences, IT, business services, contents and infrastructure.  
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (5) Serv ices; (i) Financial services: paragraph 47, 
page 87:  
88. Canada would be grateful for any clarifi cation of the Government’s implementation 
plan of the revised Postal Service Privatization Act, including opportunities for further 
consultation with private service providers. 
 
RESPONSE 
The Government has implemented the Public Co mment Procedure and developed cabinet orders 
and ministerial ordinances necessary for enforcing the revised Postal Services Privatization Act. 
 
The Postal Services Privatization Committee h as conducted Public Comment Procedures, and 
where necessary, hearings from stakeholders af ter the application for authorization of new 
products of the Japan Post Bank and th e Japan Post Insurance was submitted 
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (5) Servi ces; (iii) Transport (a) Maritime Transport: 
paragraph 76, page 98: 
 
89. Could Japan explain if there is legislation th at restricts the coasting trade (between at 
least two domestic ports) to nationally re gistered vessels? If so, Canada would be 
grateful if Japan could provide the link to this legislation. 
 
90. Other than through agreements or treaties, is  there a mechanism that  allows for the use 
of foreign vessels in Japan’s coasting trade? Can Japan provide information on this mechanism?  
 RESPONSE 
Ship law (Law No.46 of 1899), Article 3, prohi bits foreign flag vessels from engaging in 
carriages between ports in Japan, unless otherwise sp ecified in laws and regulations of Japan or 
international agreements to which Japan is a part y, or in order to avoid shipwreck or capture. 
The link to this legislation is available only in Japanese.  
http://law.e-gov.go.jp/cgi-bin/idxselect .cgi?IDX_OPT=1&H_NA ME=%91%44%94%95%96%
40&H_NAME_YOMI=%82%a0&H_NO_GENGO=H&H_NO_YEAR=&H_NO_TYPE=2&H
_NO_NO=&H_FILE_NAME=M32HO046&H_ RYAKU=1&H_CTG=1&H_YOMI_GUN=1&
H_CTG_GUN=1  
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (5) Services;  (iv) Construction: pa ragraph 96, page 105: 
 
The Secretariat’s Report states that for the cons truction sector, technical norms and regulations 
have an important role.  
91. For construction using wood, are there differe nt norms that apply to public projects?    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 119 
 
 
 92. If yes, what are the norms and regulations specific to public construction? Could Japan 
provide a list of such technical norms and regulations specific to wood construction? 
 
RESPONSE 
There are no different norms for construction using wood that apply to public projects. 
 
93. What licensing processes or specific requirements must suppliers comply with 
regarding construction using wood? 
 RESPONSE 
There are no such requirements applied to those suppliers. 
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (5) Serv ices; (iv) Construction: table, page 106: 
 
The Report notes that Japan’s "Green" public procurement rules, particularly The Law 
Concerning the Promotion of Contracts Cons idering Reduction of Emissions of Greenhouse 
Gases and Others by the State and Others En tities, obliges the national government and other 
entities to promote environmentally friendly contract s and to publish and to notify the results of 
such contracts to the Minister of the Environment.    
94. What are the requirements of The Law Concerning the Promotion of Contracts 
Considering Reduction of Emissions of Gree nhouse Gases and Others by the State and 
Others Entities when conducting government procurement? Are there particular incentives given to companies, including SMEs by this Law or by the “"Green" public procurement rules”? 
 
RESPONSE 
In official procurement based on the Law Con cerning the Promotion of Contracts Considering 
Reduction of Emissions of Greenhouse Gases and Others (the Green Contract Law), the Ministry of the Environment (hereinafter referr ed to as "MOE") specifies requirements in six 
types of contracts such as: 
 
Contracts on the supply of electricity:  Bidders who fulfill such requirements as the CO2 emission coefficient can only participate in the bidding.  
Contract on the procurement and lease of automobiles: 
Among automobiles which meet the requirements sp ecified in the Green Procurement Law (eg. 
emissions gas standards, gas mileage standard, ), those with best evaluation on the price and gas 
mileage will be procured.  Contracts on the procurement of ships designing services: 
Bidders are required to submit technical proposal which includes technology concerning low 
CO2 emission. A bidder with the best proposal will be selected.   Incentive is that the companies which give consid eration to environmental impact will be given 
advantage over other companies in the bidding of the public procurement. 
 
95. How does Japan define “environmentally  friendly contracts”? What are the 
specifications of such contracts?  
 
RESPONSE 
In Article 2 of the Green Contact Law, the MO E defines “environmentally friendly contracts” as 
“contracts considering reduction of emissions  of greenhouse gases and others.  ”Greenhouse WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 120 
 
 
 gases and others” means any adverse effects on the environment generated by human activities 
which may cause interference with environmental conservation.  Details of the Law can be found here:  http://www.env.go.jp/en/laws/policy/green/contract1.pdf  
 
96. How does the law, or any related policy, comp ly with Japan’s obligations to not have 
any discriminatory effect of foreign sourced  goods or services for procurements covered 
under the WTO GPA?  
 RESPONSE 
The Basic Policy under the Green Contract Law is formulated in consistent with the WTO/GPA. 
Every revision of the Basic Policy is always reported to the Government Procurement Committee of the WTO.  
97. Could Japan provide details on its “Green public procurement policy”? Are there 
publicly available documents? 
 
RESPONSE 
Please refer to the following URL. 
 
Green Contract Law (Law and Basic Policy) (In English) 
http://www.env.go.jp/en/laws/policy/green/contract.html  
Pamphlet of Green Contract Law (In English) 
http://www.env.go.jp/policy/ga/bp_mat/01whole-02/en_full.pdf  
Law on Promoting Green Purchasing (Law and Basic Policy) (In English)  
http://www.env.go.jp/en/laws/policy/green/index.html  
 
98. Where are the results of contracts published? 
 
RESPONSE 
The MOE publishes the results of contracts at the following website: 
 
Results of Green Contract Law (In Japanese) http://www.env.go.jp/council/35hairyo-keiyaku/y3511-02/ref01.pdf   
http://www.env.go.jp/council/35hairyo-keiyaku/y350-18/mat06-1.pdf   
 
Results of Law on Promoting Green Purchasing (In Japanese) 
http://www.env.go.jp/press/press.php?serial=15319    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 121 
 
 
 12. BRAZIL 
QUESTIONS FROM BRAZIL 
 
QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SECRETARIAT REPORT  
III TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  Page 42, paragraph 61  
The report by the Secretariat states that "Japan 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 [.] 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 st udy data equivalent in quantity to those used 
in scientific evaluations by the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) and the 
Joint FAO/WHO Experts Committees on Food Additives (JECFA)".  Question : 
1. According to the Japanese answers to the latest Trade Policy Review of Japan 
(document WT/TPR/M/243/Add.1), there was no MRL set for flutriafol in coffee beans, 
and a uniform limit of 0.01 ppm was applied fo r this substance. However, this MRL is 
lower than the MRL defined for this substa nce in Codex Alimentarius. Please indicate 
whether Japan intends to bring its flutriafol MRL into line with the Codex standard. 
 RESPONSE: Japan had intended to set the MRL for flutriafol in coffee beans at 0.05 ppm 
based on the application filed by Brazil for se tting an import tolerance. However, Japan has 
decided to change the first draft limit of 0. 05 to 0.2 ppm, taking the Codex MRL ( 0.15 ppm) 
into consideration. Japan will proceed with le gal procedures toward the enforcement of the 
finalized MRL.  
Page 61 (Para 139 to 144) 
 In recent times, it has been observed a worldwide su rge in the backlog of patent applications, to 
which Members responded by rationalizing resour ces and developing measures to address this 
surge while maintaining quality and examining app lications in an exped ite manner. Paragraphs 
139 to 144 provide details on a range of initiativ es to improve quality and timeliness of patent 
examination.  Questions : 
2.Could Japan please provide details of the metrics used to evaluate patent quality at the 
JPO and their impact on timeliness of patent examination? 
 RESPONSE: (In this question, we regard the word “patent quality” as “examination quality”.) 
The metrics that the JPO uses to measu re examination quality are as follows: 
(a) Results of Sample Check 
JPO uses the percentage of cases in whic h errors are found by sample checks. 
(b) Related statistics, such as grant rate a nd statistics based on appeal results etc.  
Although these statistics do not directly indicat e examination quality, they can be used as 
secondary metrics to indirectly monitor examination quality. 
(c) Evaluation by users  Though this evaluation, in the same way as fo r (b), does not directly indicate examination 
quality, it can also be used as secondary metrics. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 122 
 
 
 Please note that currently there are no metri cs for evaluating the quality of individual 
applications. Furthermore, JPO has not yet grasped the impact of the metrics on the timeliness of patent examination.  3.Regarding the outsourcing of prior art sea rches to non-governmental search agencies, 
are there measures in place to evaluate the quality of such outsourced searches and to 
avoid the influence of vested interests?  
RSEPONSE: Examiners review all search reports ma de by non-governmental search agencies 
and give feedback to these agencies. Furtherm ore, based on the above evaluations, external 
experts select necessary search agencies properly and fairly. 
 
Page 63 (Para 152) 
 
Paragraph 152 states that "Japan has no GI registra tion system", and that, in this context, the 
"Commissioner of the National Tax Agency designates places where wines, spirits, and 
Japanese Sake are produced if the GI fu lfils the fundamental principle (.)". 
 
Question: 
4.Could Japan please provide details on the reg istration process of foreign GIs related to 
wines and spirits? What are the criteria u sed by the Commissioner of the National Tax 
Agency to evaluate that foreign GIs request  fulfils the fundamental principle under the 
Japanese law? Is there any difference between th e process of foreign wines/spirits and 
Japanese Sake? 
 
RESPONSE: In Japan, additional protection for GIs fo r wines and spirits is domestically 
implemented in accordance with the Standard for Indication in Relation to Geographical 
Indications (hereinafter referred to as “the Standards”) based on the Law Concerning Liquor 
Business Association and Measures fo r Securing Revenue from Liquor Tax. 
 
In accordance with the Standards, indications for wines and spirits are protected without any 
need for designation of GIs, in  cases where the indication satisfies the requirement (or so-called 
criteria) provided for in the provisions of paragr aph 1 of the Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement 
and where the territory, region or a locality relate d to the indication is of a member of the WTO 
other than Japan. 
 
For indications related to a territory, region or a locality of Japan, the Commissioner of the 
National Tax Agency designates indications as GI in cases where the indication satisfies the requirement (or so-called criteria)  provided for in the provisions of  paragraph 1 of the Article 22 
of the TRIPS Agreement.  
Page 64 (Para 155) 
 Paragraph 155 states that the Copyright Act was amended in 2009 in order to extend exceptions 
and limitations on copyright with a view to f acilitate the use of copyrighted works over the 
internet. 
 
Question: 
5. Was there any challenge to this amendment, whether administrative or in court? Could 
Japan please elaborate on the scope of such amendment?    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 123 
 
 
 RESPONSE: Japan does not recognize that there are any objections or judicial precedents 
regarding the limitations and exceptions to fac ilitate the exploitation of works on the Internet, 
etc, which were newly stipulated in the amendments of the Copyright Act in 2009. 
 
Following provisions are examples of these limitations and exceptions; Article 47 quinquies 
(reproduction for the prevention, etc. of a difficulty in transmission), Article 47 sexies (reproduction etc. for a retrieval, etc. of a di fficulty in transmitter identification code of 
information which has been made transmittabl e), Article 47 septies (reproduction, etc. for 
analyzing information), Article 47 octies (reproduc tion for exploitation of works which is based 
on a computer. 
 
Page 66 (Para 165) 
 Paragraph 165 provides details of measures put in place by Japanese authorities in order to 
counter the tendency of IPR infringement. Nevertheless, it is known that enforcement 
mechanisms may be used for anticompet itive purposes, thus damaging competitors. 
 
Question: 
6.Is there any measure available for the combat  of abusive enforcement mechanisms, such 
as sham litigation? 
 RESPONSE:  With regard to the border enforcem ent, Japan Customs adopts the following 
measures to combat the abusive enforcement.  Japan Customs may require a deposit for the appl icant of application fo r suspension when it 
considers it is necessary to secure compensa tion for damages for importers caused by 
identification procedures.  Importers may request Customs the release of th e suspended goods which are suspected to be 
infringing Intellectual Property Rights, where identification procedures are being taken for the goods involving patent rights, utility model rights  or design rights based on the application for 
suspension by right holders. In this case, Japan  Customs requires deposits for such importers. 
 Page 85 (Para 39 to 40)  
Questions: 
7.Please specify on an annual basis th e amount of any expenditures under the 
"Eco-Friendly High-Performance Regional Jet" and "Eco-Friendly High-Performance Regional Jet Engine" programs from its inception and the recipients of these funds. Please also clarify the roles of the Cabinet Office, the Ministry of Economy, Trade, & Industry ("METI"), the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency ("JAXA), and the New Energy and 
Industrial Technology Development Organiz ation ("NEDO") in this programme. 
 RESPONSE:  Japan’s subsidies related to aircraft s can be found in Japan’s notification 
(G/SCM/N/186/JPN, G/SCM/N/220/JPN) pursuant to Article 25 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.  
The most recent status of the subsidies is as follows. 
Annual amount budgeted for “Subsidies of Expen se to Investigate the Development of Next 
Generation Airplanes” is: 
Fiscal year 2010 (final results): \ 65 million. Fiscal year 2011 (final results): \ 64 million. 
Annual amount budgeted for “Assistance for Development of Civil Aircraft” : 
Fiscal year 2007 (final results): \ 1,050 million. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 124 
 
 
  Fiscal year 2008 (final results): \ 433 million. 
 
8.Please provide an explanation of the purpose of the "Act on Special Measures for Industrial Revitalization and Innovation", th e "Detection & Prediction Technology of 
Highly Complex System Troubles R&D" and the "Technology Related to Carbon Fiber 
Composite Material R&D" programs, how they work, the amount of assistance provided on an annual basis since the inception of the programmes, and the recipients. Please also 
clarify the role of METI in those programmes.  
RESPONSE:  Japanese Government certificates appli cants (enterprises) under the "Act on 
Special Measures for Industrial Revitalizati on and Innovation". The law has supported the 
enterprises’ efforts in business reconstructi on, undertaking new business, and increasing 
productivity.  The numbers of certifications since the 2003 fiscal year are as follows 
 
FY 2003: 75  FY 2006: 33  FY 2009: 37 FY 2004: 75  FY 2007: 22  FY 2010: 35 FY 2005: 65  FY 2008: 18  FY 2011: 22  
Regarding the two measures mentioned in the quest ion other than the "Act on Special Measures 
for Industrial Revitalization and Innovation", these measures seem to be developed by the 
private sector, and the Japanese Government is not aware of the details.  
9.Please provide an explanation of the "Ai rcraft Export Insurance" program, how it 
works, the amount of assistance provided on  an annual basis since the inception of the 
programme and the recipients. Please also clarify the roles of Nippon Export and 
Investment Insurance ("NEXI") in the pr ogramme and in advising on sales of 
Japanese-origin aircraft more generally.  
RESPONSE:  There is no export insurance program exclus ive for in the aircraft sector. Even if 
such an export insurance program is introduced, it will be provided in a way fully compatible 
with international rules.  
 
10.Please provide an explanation of the "Asia No. 1 Aerospace Industry Cluster Special 
District" programme, how it works, the amount  of assistance provided on an annual basis 
since the inception of the program, and the recipients, and clarify the roles of the Office of 
the Prime Minister, Aichi Prefecture, Gifu Prefecture, Nagoya City, JDB, DBJ, and Shoku Chukin Bank. Please outline the activities of the Japan Development Bank ("JDB") and the Development Bank Of Japan Inc. ("DBJ") in connection with the Mitsubishi Regional 
Jet and "Asia No. 1 Aerospace Industry Cluster Special District."  
RESPONSE:  ”The Special Zone to Create Asia’s No.1 Aerospace Industry Cluster” promotes a 
mass production system, and establishment of ne w efficient production and supply system.  It 
aims at expanding and reinforcing the aerospa ce industry in this region and forming an 
aerospace industry cluster. Fiscal support as a subsidy provided by the Government of Japan in 2012 was approximately 4 
million yen. 
 
Roles of each player: The Office of the Prime Minister (Cabinet O ffice and Cabinet Secretariat): Operating the 
Comprehensive Special Zone System (CSZ). 
Ministries concerned: Implementing regul atory exceptions and support measures 
Local governments: Implementing regulatory exceptions and support measures at a local level   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 125 
 
 
 Financial institutions: Pr oviding financial support 
 The Prime Minister has designated 3 banks: The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, the 
Development Bank of Japan, and Sumitomo Mits ui Banking Corporation, as the financial 
institutions which provide financial suppor t to relevant projects in the CSZ. 
 With regard to the function of financial suppor t in the CSZ, there is no difference among these 3 
banks.  
The Mitsubishi Regional Jet is not regarded as a relevant project which can warrant financial 
support in the CSZ so far.  
 
11.Please provide an explanation of the purpose of the "R&D for Highly Efficient 
Technology for Domestic Passenger Planes" pr ogramme, how it works, the amount of 
assistance provided on an annual basis sinc e the inception of the programme, and the 
recipients. Please also clarify the roles of METI, the Ministry of Education, Culture, 
Sports, Science and Technology, the Ministry of Land Infrastructure and Transport, the 
Ministry of Defense, JAXA, and NEDO.  
RESPONSE:  The purpose of the program is to c onduct R&D of fundamental technologies for 
current and future aircrafts, such as improvement  of aircraft fuel efficiency to reduce CO2 
emissions, reduction of aircraft noise, and improveme nt of aircraft safety. This program started 
in 2003, and its annual budgets are as follows (all figures in Japanese Yen): 
 FY2003 : 0.08 billion 
 FY2004 : 1.53 billion 
 FY2005 : 2.35 billion  
 FY2006 : 1.58 billion 
 FY2007 : 1.19 billion 
 FY2008 : 1.33 billion 
 FY2009 : 1.29 billion 
 FY2010 : 1.27 billion 
 FY2011 : 1.04 billion 
 FY2012 : 0.86 billion 
 
This R&D aims to contribute to the advancem ent of aeronautical science and technology in 
general, and it is not intended to support the de velopment of specific aircraft. This program has 
been implemented by JAXA, based on a grant from  the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, 
Science and Technology (MEXT).  12.Please provide a description of the "Hisho" aircraft testing programme, administered by JAXA. Please explain, for example, ho w the program works, the amounts expended 
under the programme, and the entities benefiting from those expenditures.  
RESPONSE:  “Hisho” is a Jet FTB (Flyi ng Test Bed) designed to c onduct flight demonstrations 
of cutting-edge aeronautical technologies devel oped by JAXA. The amount expended under this 
program up to 2012 is 2.95 billio n yen. By using this FTB, JAXA can contribute to the flight 
demonstration of onboard equipment and com ponents, and provide technical knowledge and 
proposals for flight test methods and standard s for new aeronautical technologies. JAXA’s use 
of this FTB “Hisho” is not intended to s upport the development of specific aircraft.  
 
13.Please explain the "Air Fleet Sharing Syst em", reported to be under consideration by 
Fukushima Prefecture, among others. Please iden tify the aircraft that would participate in WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 126 
 
 
 that system and the amounts that will be expended from government  sources or sources 
affiliated with the government.  
RESPONSE:  Although it was reported that there was a plan developed by the private sectors 
concerning a system for sharing airplanes in ru ral areas, the Japanese Government is not aware 
of the details of the plan.  
 
14.Please identify support provided by prefectur al and municipal authorities in connection 
with the construction of production facilities for the Mitsubishi Regional Jet. For example, 
has any government entity or entity affiliate d with the government purchased or otherwise 
made available land for facilities related to production and testing? On what terms has 
such land been made available? What are th e other programmes related to taxes and land 
incentives or other incentives for industry loca tion and establishment, how it works, the 
amount of any assistance provided on an annual basis since the inception of the programs, and the recipients? 
 RESPONSE:  Japan’s policies for the development of the manufacturing industry are fully 
consistent with the WTO rules. There is no su pport provided by the Government of Japan for 
the development of commercial aircraft except as outlined in the notification made pursuant to 
Article 25 of the Agreement on Subsidies a nd Countervailing Measures (G/SCM/N/186/JPN, 
G/SCM/N/220/JPN). 
 
IV - TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
 Page 73, paragraphs 4 and 5 
 
According to the report by the Secretariat, the Japanese agriculture sector "continues to receive 
substantial government support, comprising, inte r alia, a relatively higher average MFN applied 
rate compared with other sectors; tariff quotas;  income support; and, in some subsectors, 
production controls. [.] Consumer prices of agri cultural products in Japan are considerably 
higher than the OECD average. Total transfers to agriculture producers for 2010, arising from 
Government policies, and transfers from consumers were provisionally estimated by the OECD 
at 50% and 42% of income from production. OE CD averages were 18% and 8%, respectively". 
 
Questions:  
15.Please explain the reasons why Japan needs to provide its agriculture sector with 
support at levels so much above the OECD average. 
 
RESPONSE:  Government support mainly targets the land-intensive sector, whose management 
size is very small compared to other countries (a verage size of farm managements; Japan: 2ha, 
U.S.: 170ha, Australia: 2970ha). Japan has proceed ed with agricultural policy reform and the 
level of PSE has been declining since the 19 80’s and the AMS in 2009 was reduced to 14% 
compared to Japan’s commitment level under the Agreement on Agriculture. 
 
16.Please indicate whether Japan intends to reduce those support le vels, the effects of 
which are magnified by Japan`s high agricultu re tariffs and trade restrictions, in order to 
prevent excessive or protectionist trade restrictions. 
 RESPONSE:  Japan will continue to promote struct ural reform of agriculture, including 
strengthening coordination between the food manufacturing sector and the agricultural sector, 
and consolidation of farmland, in accordance with the WTO Agreements.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 127 
 
 
 13.CHILE-2 
PREGUNTAS DE CHILE - TPR JAPON 2013 
(Nuevas Preguntas) 
 
Documentos: WT/TPR/S/276 y WT/TPR/G/276  
Regarding document  WT/TPR/G/276 : 
 
 4) OTHER REGIONAL/BILATERAL ARRANGEMENTS,  (iii) Japan's Bilateral Activities 
outside of FTAs, China”, (Pag. 13) 
 
3. Paragraph 37:  “Energy-Saving and Environment” . Question : Has it been possible to 
develop any particular initiative in these topics? 
 RESPONSE:  At the Japan-China Energy Conservation Forum (The Japanese delegation 
included the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry and other officials. The Chinese 
delegation included the Chairman of the Nati onal Development and Reform Commission and 
other officials), Japan and China have promot ed various projects a nd deepened bilateral 
cooperation between in the fields of energy c onservation and environmental protection such as 
alternative energy and smart communities. This forum has been held every year since 2006 and 
had been held seven times so far, with the attendance of representatives from the private and 
public sectors, for the sake of promoting the coope ration between Japan and China in the fields 
of energy conservation and environmental protection. 
http://www.meti.go.jp/englis h/press/2012/0806_02.html  
 
 IV. JAPAN'S DOMESTIC POLICIES. (1) REGULATORY REFORM (Pag. 18) 
 
4. Paragraph 63: … “Based on the proposals made  by the subcommittee and working groups, 
the subcommittee delivered "the First Re port by the Subcommittee on Regulatory and 
Institutional Reform". Question : Is this document publicly available? 
 
RESPONSE:  Yes.  The report is publicly available. Here is the link to the report (only the 
Japanese version is available). URL: http://www.cao.go.jp/sasshin/kisei-seido/publication/220615/item100615_01.pdf  
 
 (2) GROWTH AND FISCAL CONSOLIDATION (Pag. 19) 
 
5. Paragraph 75: …promote innovation in the fiel ds of “green (energy & environment)”… 
Question : How is the Government promoting innovation in this field?] 
 
RESPONSE:  The Government of Japan has endorsed  the 4th Science and Technology Basic 
Plan as a Cabinet Decision in August 2011, wh ich is positioned as a national strategy which 
provides fundamental principles for comprehens ive and systematic promotion of Japan’s 
science and technology policy for the next 5 years. This plan contains ”Green Innovation” as 
one of the national strategic pillars ．In pursuit of achieving the goal of green innovation, the 
plan specifies priority issues as follows: a) realization of a stable energy supply and 
lower-carbon energy, b) improvement of energy use in efficiency and functionality, and c) development of lower-carbon technologies for social infrastructure. In collaboration and cooperation with universities, public research in stitutions and industries, the government will 
focus on promoting measures related to R&D that supports this. More information on the Basic 
Plan can be found through this link:  
http://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__i csFiles/afieldfile/2012/02/22/1316511_01.pdf . 
 
6. Paragraph 76: …"Green Policy Outline”… Question : Is this document publicly available? WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 128 
 
 
  
RESPONSE:  In November 2012, then administration made public the document, the URL of 
which is as follows: http://www.npu.go.jp/greenenergy/public/pdf/green_policy.pdf  
 
Regarding document  WT/TPR/S/276-03: 
 1. APEC (Asia-Pacific Econom ic Cooperation) (pag. 17) 
 
7. Paragraph 23: …“promoting trade in environmental godos”… Question : Does Japan 
consider necessary a different strategy to pr omote trade of environmental goods other than 
the 54 applicable line tariffs set on APEC 2012? If so, which strategy is Japan considering? 
 
RESPONSE:  Japan is of the view that not only the APEC list of environmental goods agreed in 
APEC 2012 but also other measures such as elimin ating existing local content requirements set 
in the Annex C to the Honolulu Declaration in 2011 should be implemented to promote trade 
and investment in environmental goods and services.  
 
Regarding document WT/TPR/S/276-04: 
 (ii) Subsidies and other financial assistance (pag. 50) 
 
8. Paragraph 105: …With a view to stimul ating the domestic economy, the Japanese 
government re-introduced subsidies for purch asing new environmentally friendly vehicles 
in December 2011;  subsidies are provided for individuals that purchase any vehicle, 
domestically produced or imported, that meets certain criteria. Question : Could Japan 
provide more information on this program? 
 RESPONSE:  The scope of the subsidies cover passenge r cars, trucks, and buses. The value of 
the subsidies is 70,000 to 100,000 yen for each passenger car and 200,000  to 900,000 yen for 
each truck or each bus, depending on the size and weight. The conditions for receiving subsidies 
are that the vehicles meet the 2015 FY Japanese fuel efficiency standard or the 2010 FY 
Japanese fuel efficiency standard +25%. The r ecipients of subsidies are the consumers and 
companies that have purchased cars which meet such criteria.  
 9. Paragraph 106: …Four key policy areas (energy and enviro nment;  health;  agriculture, 
forestry and fisheries;  and SMEs) ar e to be prioritized over three years. Question : Could 
Japan give more information regarding this initiative? 
 RESPONSE:  Please see the following link. This initiative was adopted under the past 
administration. 
http://www.npu.go.jp/policy/ pdf/20120731/20 120731_en.pdf  
 
 Green technology plan (Pag. 58) 
 
10. Paragraph 133: … Green Technology P ackage Programme (GTPP) in 2010... Question : 
Could Japan provide further information about Green Technology Package Programme 
(GTPP)? 
 
RESPONSE:   Japan understands that, as described in Paragraph 134 of the report by the WTO 
Secretariat, the WIPO established the “WIPO Green” project as one of the WIPO measures based on the GTPP concept proposed by the JIPA, a non-profit and non-governmental organization. Japan also understands that th e JIPA has been cooperating with WIPO in 
launching the project. (Japan understands that, in other words, the GTPP has been taken over by 
the “WIPO Green”.)     WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 129 
 
 
 In addition, Japan understands that the WIPO has already launched the “WIPO Green” on a trial 
basis.  For further details, please refer to the WIPO website etc.  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 130 
 
 
 14. NORWAY 
 WTO TRADE POLICY REVIEW Japan 2013.   
Questions from Norway. 
 I. CUSTOMS CLEARANCE PROCEDURES, QUOTAS AND TARIFFS 
 
According to the Secretariat’s report on trade policies and practices by measure, measure 
directly affecting imports, customs clearance pr ocedures and valuation, paragraph 3 (page 22), 
the average time between arrival of goods and th e granting of import permission was 60.7 hours 
for sea cargo and 13.4 hours for air cargo (inclu ding time required under the "immediate import 
permission 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 
 
 Norway welcomes that the time between arrival and the granting of import 
permission has been reduced. Could further reduction in the time of handling be expected? 
 
RESPONSE:  Cargo transportation companies are working on further efficient cargo handling. 
 
Fisheries products 
 The Secretariat’s report states: “Japan is a significant net importer of fisheries products, 
importing roughly 40% of what it consumes,  and exporting comparatively very little”  
(Paragraph 26, page 81). 
 
 Considering that many of the fish-types and qualities imported to Japan are not 
competing with locally produced produc ts, is Japan considering lowering the 
tariffs on import of these particular products? 
 
RESPONSE:  The Government of Japan sets an appropr iate level of tariffs while considering 
the point raised by Norway. 
 
II. INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS 
 
III. ACCORDING TO THE SECRETARIAT’S REPORT, SUMMARY, 
PARAGRAPH 15, ABOUT 54% OF JAPANESE INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS 
(JIS) WERE ALIGNED TO INTERNA TIONAL STANDARDS IN 2011 (UP 
FROM 46% IN 2009). NORWAY WELC OMES THIS IMPROVEMENT, 
ALTHOUGH THERE IS STILL NEED FOR FURTHER HARMONIZATION OF JIS TO INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS.  
 
 Norway would like to know more about the efforts for harmonization that have 
been made since Japan’s last trade polic y review, and whether new initiatives are 
foreseen. 
 
RESPONSE:  In case of the Japanese Industrial Standard s (JIS), based on the “Guidance for the 
harmonization of JIS and interna tional standards” of November 1983, revised July 1999, Japan 
has been harmonizing JIS and internationals standards steadily. Japan will continuously 
endeavor to increase the number of JIS standa rds harmonized with international standards.  
 
    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 131 
 
 
 Streamlining of test-procedures in medical equipment 
 
Norway welcomes the progress in the area of t est-procedures in medical equipment, and the 
alignment of Japan’s GCP with ISO14155, wh ich has advanced the process of clinical 
evaluation considerably. However, clinical test s in Japan still present a number of unresolved 
issues, such as testing, use of approved produc tions and clinical tests. This necessitates 
additional expenditure and personne l, resulting in fewer European products being launched on 
the Japanese market. In Norway’s view, where medical equipment is already available on the 
European or US market, further unnecessary clinical  testing could be avoided by evaluating the 
clinical records of actual use and relevant clinical literature. 
 
 What are the future plans for approval and testing of medical equipment? 
 
RESPONSE:  Japan considers that faster and better review is an important issue and has been 
making and will make efforts towards its achie vement. Japan requires the minimum essential 
data to ensure safety and performance of a medi cal device at the premarket review and makes 
efforts to accelerate the review.  
International air transportation 
 
According to the Secretariat’s report (summary , paragraph 23), Japan’s policy on international 
air transportations has moved significantly to ward liberalization and open skies. The 
Secretariat’s report mentions that arrangeme nts with 15 countries or economies have been 
concluded. Norway welcomes the liberalizati on and open skies regarding international air 
transport. Norway would like to underline that  no differentiation should be made between new 
and incumbent airlines. When it comes to use of  all available airport infrastructures, Haneda 
should in our view be fully opened up to all international traffic, including flight to/from 
Europe, on a non-discriminatory basis.   
 Does Japan have plans to start negotiations/conclude arrangement with more 
countries in the near future? 
 
RESPONSE:  Japan will make its decisions strategica lly from the standpoint of its own national 
interests while considering partner countries in terms of factors like market size, growth, their 
forward-thinking approach to liberalization, a nd the potential for new entrants and increase of 
services.  
Free Trade Agreements 
 
The Secretariat’s report refers to Japan’s ambitious programme for expanding its already 
relatively large network of 13 Free Trad e Agreements (paragraph 14 (page 14). 
Japan has made early announcements to the WTO of agreements under negotiation with 
Australia, the Gulf Co-operation Council, and Ko rea. The report also states that Japan has 
entered into consultations with the countries cu rrently negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership 
(TPP). The Japanese authorities has also decide d to launch EPA negotia tions with Canada, 
Colombia, and Mongolia.  
 Does Japan plan to enter into negotiations with any other countries in the near 
future? 
 RESPONSE:  Japan will actively engage in EPA/FTA negotiations with selected countries of 
strategic importance to Japan.  
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 132 
 
 
 Maritime transport sector 
 
Paragraph 79 (page 99) of the Secretariat’s report (WT/TPR/S/276) states that among the most significant changes in trade-related policies in the maritime transport sector are the 
announcements in June 2011 that Japan will maintain the maritime antitrust exemption  under 
the Marine Transportation Act, w ith its scope unchanged, and that Japan plans to review this in 
the fiscal year 2015.  
 How many notifications have been filed under this scheme? 
 
RESPONSE:  About 400 notifications have been filed each year.  
 
 What are the reasons for the decision in  2010 to continue the exemption until 
2015? 
 
RESPONSE:  Firstly, no firm argument can be made to  support the abolishment of the maritime 
antitrust exemption preceding other major trading countries that maintain anti-trust exemptions. 
Secondly, considering the impact of the EU’s re peal of the liner conference block exemption on 
Asia-Europe trade conditions, there are concerns th at the abolishment of the maritime antitrust 
exemption would create an adverse effect on Japanese shipping companies and domestic shippers, culminating in a negative impact on Japanese economy as a whole.  
 Medium and long-term export credits 
 Paragraph 94 (page 48) in the Secretar iat’s report mentions briefly that JBIC  and NEXI  
administer medium- and long-term export credits .  
 
 Norway would appreciate a short descriptio n of the Japanese export credit system 
and the terms and conditions offered by  JBIC and NEXI to finance Japanese 
export, including shipbuilding contracts with foreign ship owners.  
RESPONSE:  JBIC provides export loans to overseas importers and financial institutions for 
supporting the export of Japanese machinery and equipment, including ships, and technology 
mainly to developing countries (please refer to the JBIC website ( http://www.jbic.go.jp/en/ ) for 
more information). 
 NEXI provides trade insurance that protect s companies from risks arising from overseas 
transactions (please refer to the NEXI website ( http://www.nexi.go.jp/en/ ) for more 
information). 
 
Terms and conditions of export loans and trade insurance are determined based on the OECD 
Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits. 
 
 We would like to raise the issue of in terest rates and insurance premiums and 
would appreciate an elaboration of JBIC and NEXI’s pricing practice on both 
loans and credit insurance. 
 
RESPONSE:  JBIC and NEXI provide export loans a nd trade insurance based on the terms and 
conditions of the OECD arrangement on officia lly supported export credit. Please refer to JBIC 
and NEXI website ( http://www.jbic.go.jp/en/  and http://www.nexi.go.jp/en/ ) for more 
information.  
     WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 133 
 
 
 The appreciation of the Yen 
 
Paragraph 7 (page 3) of the Secretariat’s report highlights the appreciation of the Yen as 
contributing to Japan’s weakening internationa l competitiveness. The report by Japan concurs 
(I.2. page 5). Japan intervened in the forei gn exchange market in October/November 2011 to 
counter volatility in exchange rates.  
 Could Japan comment on the conditions wh ich have to be present for the Bank of 
Japan to intervene in the foreign exchange market?  
RESPONSE:  Japan does not make any comment. 
 
 Could Japan also comment on the recent doub ling of the BOJs inflation target to 
2%, and whether Japan is considering adopting any new policies aimed at countering volatile exchange rates? 
 RESPONSE:  The Bank of Japan recognizes that the infla tion rate consistent with price stability 
on a sustainable basis will rise as efforts by a wide range of entities toward strengthening competitiveness and growth potential of Japan’s  economy make progress.  Based on this 
recognition, the Bank of Japan sets the price stab ility target at 2 percent in terms of the 
year-on-year rate of change in the consumer price index.  
The aim of the monetary policy conducted by the Bank of Japan is to overcome deflation as 
early as possible and achieve sustainable ec onomic growth with price stability.  In 
implementing its monetary policy objective, the Bank of Japan does not and will not aim to weaken the yen.  
In any case, Japan will continue to closely mon itor the developments in exchange markets. 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 134 
 
 
 15. ARGENTINA 
Trade Policy Review of Japan 
Questions from Argentina 
Report of the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/276) 
 
A. Measures directly affecting imports (Section III-1) 
1. Could Japan please specify the tariff lines of the commodity products, amongst them fish products, subject to non-tariff import restrictions? (please see last sentence in Paragraph 21).  
REPONSE:  Please refer to WTO document G/LIC/N/3/JPN/10, 4 October 2011, about 
concrete products subject to the current Japanese import restrictions.  
 2. Taking into account the provision eliminating non-t ariff import restrictions in Article XI:1 of 
GATT94, could Japan please explain the consistenc y of such non-tariff import restrictions with 
this GATT rule? 
 
RESPONSE: The justifications for the import restrictions are Article XI-2(c), XX(b), XX(g) 
and XXI(b) of the GATT.  3. Paragraph 22:  
a) Could Japan please explain the reasons of the system for licensing and import quotas for 
marine products?  b) Although notification G/LIC/N/3/JPN/10 (to wh ich the document refers) clarifies that the 
import licensing system is  “to ensure that the fish products caught by foreign fishermen and 
imported to Japan do not adversely affect  fishing activities by Japanese fishermen ”, could Japan 
please explain what type of damage it refers to and how it applies to producers from remote 
countries?  c) Furthermore, this notification fails to indicate the grounds for the import quota system for marine products. Could Japan please provide this justification? 
 RESPONSE:  (a) The aim of import restriction of certain fishery products is to abide by the 
international treaties which Japan concluded an d to ensure proper management of fishery 
resource. (b) Japanese fishermen operate fishing activiti es in compliance with RFMO’s measures on the 
management of fishery resources. Illegal fishing activities operated by foreign fishermen that do 
not comply with these measures affect adversel y not only fish stocks but also Japanese 
fishermen’s activities. Therefore, under the schem e of the import licensing system, the Japanese 
Government controls the direct imports of the fishery products caught by the foreign fishermen. 
(b) The import quota system for fishery prod ucts is implemented based on GATT Articles 
11.2(c) and 20(g). It was notified to the Committee on Market Access (G/MA/NTM/QR/1/Add.12). 
 
4. Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measur es – Medidas sanitarias y fitosanitarias:  
a) Argentina expresses its concern for undue delays of Japan in the process of authorizing access to the Japanese market for bovine meat, citric fruit and bees. 
Could Japan please explain the reasons for these delays? Could Japan please provide a timeframe for a favorable response to the last proposals 
submitted by Argentina? 
b) We regret the sudden import restrict ions applied by Japan on blueberries from 
Argentina and other countries, which prev ent any access to the Japanese market. Is 
there sufficient scientific evidence ju stifying such import restrictions? 
 
RESPONSE: a) [Animal health] Japan conducts risk assessment for animal and animal 
products to be imported to Japan according to the “Standard Procedure for Approval for Import   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 135 
 
 
 of Designated Items into Japan to be Quarantined ”. Regarding the risk assessment for beef from 
Argentina to Japan, Japan is now waiting for the additional information from Argentina. 
Regarding the honey bees from Argentina to Japan, Jap an is now preparing a draft of the animal 
health requirements with due consideration fo r the comments submitted by Argentina in June 
2012. 
 [Plant health] Regarding citric fruit, we have b een discussing with Servicio Nacional de Sanidad 
y Calidad Agroalimentaria (SENASA) of Argent ina about the plant quarantine condition to 
allow fresh citrus to be imported to Japan. To consider phytosanitary measures requires a 
sufficient amount of time. For example, it took two years for SENASA to submit the 
examination plan after Japan requested it. Now Japan is examining the report of the on-site 
confirmatory test and will inform SENASA of  the result of our consideration as soon as 
possible.  b) Japan decided that Blueberry ( Vaccinium  spp.) is host plant for Mediterranean fruit fly 
(Ceratitis capitata ) based on scientific evidence unde rmentioned and amended the Annexed 
Table 2 of the Enforcement Ordinance of the Pl ant Protection Law (the list of import prohibited 
plants) on March 3, 2011 after notifying WT O/SPS (G/SPS/N/JPN/266 of November 4, 2010). 
Japan prohibits fresh blueberry imports from all of the countries where the Mediterranean fruit 
fly appears as it is harmful pest for Japan. A ll the countries where the Mediterranean fruit fly 
has spread, including Argentina, are subject to the ban. 
 Reference USDA-APHIS (2007) Host Susceptibility of Blueberr y (Vaccinium spp.) to Mediterranean Fruit 
Fly [Ceratitis capitata (Wiedemann)] and South American Fruit Fly [Anastrepha fraterculis 
(Wiedemann)] 
 USDA-APHIS (2007) A Pathway-Initiated Risk As sessment. Importation of  fresh highbush and 
rabbit-eye blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum L & V.  virgatum Aiton) fruit into the Continental 
United States from Uruguay. 
 Original in Spanish: a) La Argentina manifiesta su preocupación por las demoras indebidas de Japón en el proceso de autorización del acceso  al mercado japonés para carne bovina, 
cítricos y abejas vivas procedentes de Argentina. ¿Puede explicar Japón a qué se deben esas demoras?  
¿En qué plazo considera Japón que podrá dar respuesta favorable a las últimas 
propuestas presentadas sobre estos temas por la Argentina?   b) Lamentamos la repentina aplicación de  restricciones a la importación para los 
arándanos frescos provenientes de la Argen tina y de otros países, que impiden todo 
acceso al mercado japonés. ¿Existe evidencia  científica suficiente que justifique tales 
restricciones a la importación? 
 
B. Measures directly affecting exports (Section III-2). 
Could Japan please inform about the products s ubject to export controls under Japan’s Free 
Trade Agreements (Last sentence in Paragraph 87)?  
RESPONSE:  As described in Paragraph 87 of the Secret ariat’s report, export controls are also 
applied to certain products under Japan’s EPA/FTAs. Japan’s export control system is stipulated 
by the Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act.  Please refer to the Export Trade Control Order 
(websites below) for the list of goods under the export control. (English: the previous version)  
http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp /law/detail_main?re= 02&vm=02&id=1925 
(Japanese: the latest version)  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 136 
 
 
 http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/S24/S24SE378.html 
 
C. Measures affecting production and trade (Section III-3). 
1. P ARAGRAPH 125:  “THE NATIONAL IP STRATEGIC PROGRAMME 2010  REAFFIRMED THE 
IMPORTANCE OF AN INTERNATIONAL ST ANDARDIZATION STRATEGY IN IMPROVING JAPAN 'S 
INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS , AND RECOMMENDED MAKI NG A LINKAGE BETWEEN 
JAPAN 'S TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANTAGES AND INTERNAT IONAL COMPETIVENESS THROUGH IP 
PROTECTION AND INTERNATIONAL STANDARDIZATION . IT SET UP CLEAR TARGET INDICTORS AS 
OF 2020:  (1) TO FORMULATE AND IMPLEMENT STANDARD ROADMAPS IN SPECIFIC 
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 INCREASE THE NUMBER OF STANDARD -SETTING 
PROCESSES WHERE JAPAN WORKS AS SECRETARIAT (150  CASES ); AND (4) TO ESTABLISH 
INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS IN THE AREAS WHERE ASSESSMENT METHODS AND STANDARDS 
PLAY IMPORTANT ROLES IN REALIZING ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION , AND SAFETY AND 
SECURITY . “ 
 Given the importance that local specificities have  when referring to environmental protection, 
could Japan please explain how their participa tion in standard-setting processes where Japan 
works as secretariat takes fully into account the different circumstances and characteristics of 
countries, in particular of developing countries, so as to contribute to the achievement of that 
legitimate objective not creating unnecessar y obstacles to international trade?  
 RESPONSE:  In the standardization process in ISO/ IEC, standards are developed based on a 
consensus among parties, and it is a basic princi ple that the standards should be acceptable to 
broader parties and be develope d taking into account the views of all parties concerned under 
the leadership of a chairperson. This is not limited to the field of the environment. Japan 
participates in the standardization and undertakes the task of the secretar iat in accordance with 
this principle.  In addition, with regard to the concerns rela ted to developing countries, the ISO/IEC process 
complies with the WTO’s Second Triennial Review  of the operation and implementation of the 
Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (T BT) (2000) which refers to the “development 
dimension” in Annex 4. Therefore, ISO/IEC en courages developing countries to participate in 
the standardization, and Japan as a member of ISO/IEC also encourages their participation. 
 
2. Paragraph 133: “T
HE JAPANESE INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ASSOCIATION (JIPA)  
INTRODUCED THE GREEN TECHNOLOGY PACKAGE PROGRAMME (GTPP)  IN 2010,  WITH THE 
MAIN PURPOSE OF ESTABLISHING A GLOBAL  COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGY 
INFORMATION DATABASE , WHICH WOULD FACILITATE THE TRANSFER OF TECHNOLOGY 
BETWEEN PROSPECTIVE TECHNOLOGY USERS AND POTENTIAL PROVIDERS WORLDWIDE .” 
 
As regards the Green Technology Package Programme: 
a) Could Japan please explain what tools and mechanisms would facilitate the transfer of technology between prospective technology users and potential providers worldwide? b) In particular, how are the specific needs and circumstances of developing countries taken 
into account so that they can benefit from that technology transfer?  
 
RESPONSE:  Japan understands that, as described in  Paragraph 134 of the report by the WTO 
Secretariat, the WIPO established the “WIPO Green” project as one of the WIPO measures based on the GTPP concept proposed by the JIPA, a non-profit and non-governmental organization. Japan also understands that the JIPA has been cooperating with the WIPO in 
launching the project. (Japan understands that, in other words, the GTPP has been taken over by 
the “WIPO Green”.)   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 137 
 
 
 In addition, Japan understands that the WIPO has already launched the “WIPO Green” on a trial 
basis.  For further details, please refer to the WIPO website etc. 
As to your questions a) and b), in particular, please refer to the WIPO Green related materials 
(as below, for example).  WIPO MAGAZINE  WIPO GREEN: Facilita ting Dissemination of Green Technology 
http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/wi po_magazine/en/pdf/2012/wipo_pub_121_2012_03.p
df 
 
D. Trade Policies by sector – agriculture (Section IV-1): 
1. The Basic Law on Food, Agriculture and Rura l Areas continues to provide the framework 
and policy direction for agriculture referred to in Paragraph 2 but does not mention any 
objective related to the continua tion of the ongoing reform pro cess of agricultural policies in 
Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture in  accordance to the mandate of agricultural 
negotiations of the Doha Round.  
a) Could Japan explain how the objectives of th e Basic Law on Food, Agricultural and Rural 
Areas are consistent with the objective in Artic le 20 of the Agreement and the mandate of 
agricultural negotiations of the Doha Round? 
b) In particular, could Japan explain how main taining ”high tariffs” mentioned in Paragraph 
4 or the continuity of support schemes men tioned in Paragraph 5, contribute to the 
continuation of the reform process? 
 
RESPONSE:  a) One of the main objectives of the Basic Law is the sustainable development of agriculture, 
which the Basic Law stipulates should be pursu ed through enhancing agricultural productivity 
and expanding the scale of farm management. Th e government is proceeding with agricultural 
policy reform posed on the Basic Law. B) Most of high tariffs are those resulted from tariffication at the conclusion of Uruguay Round. 
They are implemented in acco rdance with Japan’s schedule. 
 2. Consumers in Japan face “considerably highe r” prices of agricultural products than the 
OECD average (Paragraph 5).  
a) Could Japan explain how it intends to a ddress the concerns of consumers about such 
higher prices, in particular food prices? 
b) Would Japan conclude that higher food prices are caused by high protection in 
agricultural products? c) Would Japan contribute to international e fforts in reducing excessive price volatility by 
substantially improving market access in its ow n market, including by substantially reducing 
or eliminating import restrictions of food products? 
 
RESPONSE: 
a) Japan has been promoting agricultural refo rm including abolishing market price support for 
rice in 1998 and, for example, the consumer pr ice of rice has fallen by more than 20% in 
nominal terms compared to 1990’s. Stable f ood supply to domestic consumers is ensured 
through an appropriate combination of domestic production, imports and reserve. 
 b) A certain level of support is necessary, especi ally for the land-intensive sector whose size of 
management is very small, in order to ensure sustainable development of agriculture. Even so, 
the government is promoting agricultural structur al reform to improve productivity including 
these sectors. 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 138 
 
 
 c) Japan has been providing a large food market for many exporting countries as the largest 
net-food importing country in the world. Also , Japan has been advocating, in the Doha 
Development Agenda negotiations, the necessity of coexistence of various types of agriculture, 
which contributes to reducing the risk for global food security that the concentration of food 
production in a small number of counties may exacerbate the volatility of the food supply 
caused by climate change etc. In addition, one of causes of increasing volatility in food price in 
recent years is export restriction measures. Japan  has been insisting on strengthening discipline 
on export prohibitions/restrictions in DDA negotia tions, as well as taking initiative on the work 
concerning improving notification of export restri ction in the regular session of the Committee 
on Agriculture. 
 
E. Trade Policies by sector – fisheries  (Section IV-2): 
1. Taking into account that Japan is a net importe r of fish products (Paragraph 26) and that fish 
subsidies are harmful for the sustainability of fish resources, could Japan please explain how the 
very high levels of fisheries subsidies referred to in Paragraphs 32-35 are consistent with the 
need to ensure the sustaina bility of fish resources?  
 RESPONSE:  The basic position of the Government of  Japan at the WTO negotiations has been 
that not all fisheries subsidies are harmful to th e sustainability of fishery resources. Therefore, 
Japan cannot accept Argentina’s position that th e fisheries subsidies are harmful to the 
sustainability of fishery resources. As mentione d in Secretariat’s report (paragraph 32-35), the 
Japanese Government’s fishery budget allocations are aimed at supporting the recovery from the 
earthquake and tsunami disaster, and achieving various policy objectives such as resource 
management, environmental conservation, cr ew safety and accommodation, and the social 
welfare of fishery workers.    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 139 
 
 
 16.NEW ZEALAND 
WTO Trade Policy Review: Japan 
19-21 February 2013 
Questions from New Zealand 
 
REPORT BY THE WTO SECRETARIAT (WT/TPR/S/276)  SUMMARY 
 WTO/TPR/S276, p.vii, para 18 
 
The summary of the Secretariat report, p.vii, paragraph 18 notes that Japan ”has continued to 
move away from price support toward income s upport”, however, later in the report it is also 
noted that there has been no change to price support schemes since 2011 (p.78 para 15).  
Question: 
1. Could Japan please explain how it is con tinuing to move away from price support 
measures and what future  changes are envisaged? 
 
RESPONSE:  Japan has introduced direct payments to farmers in hilly and mountainous areas 
and payments to conserve and improve land, wate r, and the environment and direct payments to 
crop farmers, while having abolished government  procurement of rice for market price support 
in 1998. The government will promote agricultural structural reforms, including strengthening 
coordination between the food manufacturing sector and the agricultural sector, and consolidation of farmland, etc. in accordance with WTO Agreements. 
 
SECTION III: TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
1) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS  
 
 (ii) Tariffs 
(a) Bound tariff 
 
WTO/TPR/S276, p.23, para 9 
 Section III, paragraph 9 of the Secretariat report notes that Japan’s average bound tariff rate for 
agricultural products is 17.8%.  However, Sec tion II, paragraph 15 of the Secretariat report 
notes that a degree of liberalisation on agri culture products has happened under Japan’s 
Regional Trade Agreements (RTAs), including with  India (59.6% of agriculture products were 
liberalised) and Peru (61.6%).  Question: 
2. Given agriculture products have tended to “b e excluded from liberalisation or subject to 
restricted liberalisation through tariff ra te quotas” (Section II, p.15, para 15), could 
Japan please provide the final average bound ta riff rate for agricultural products under 
each of the RTAs which it has negotiated?  
 
RESPONSE:  Japan has not calculated average tariff ra te under each of the RTAs which it has 
negotiated, as the Average tariff rate varies acco rding to calculation method, such as treatments 
of tariff rate quotas or AVEs etc. The tariff schedules of RTAs Japan has concluded are available on the Regional Trade Agreements Information System (RTA-IS) and the WTO Secretariat has published factual presentation docum ents which include the final average bound 
tariff rate for agricultural products for some of these RTAs.  
  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 140 
 
 
 (vii) Government procurement 
 
WTO/TPR/S276, p.34, para 36 
 
Section III, paragraph 36 of the Secretariat report notes that “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.”   Question:  
3. Can Japan please provide details of the kinds of  criteria referred to by the Secretariat 
report?  
 
RESPONSE:  The criteria vary in different procurem ents. Many examples can be found in the 
notices of procurement published in the Offi cial Gazette for government procurement. 
Website for the Official Gazette: http://kanpou.npb.go.jp/  
 
WTO/TPR/S276, p.35, para 39  
 Section III, paragraph 39 of the Secretariat repor t notes that “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 author ities maintain that the law is operated without 
distinction between domest ic and imported goods.” 
 Question:  
4. Can Japan please explain how it ensures that the law promoting use of wood in 
construction of public buildings  is operated without distin ction between domestic and 
imported goods? 
 
RESPONSE: The Act for the Promotion of Use of Wood in Public Buildings requires the 
Government of Japan to establish “The Basic Po licy”, on the basis of which prefectures make 
their plan for the use of wood. 
 
This Basic Policy clearly stipulates that, in pr omoting use of wood in public buildings, the 
central and prefectural governments should ensu re consistency with WTO rules and not to 
introduce unnecessary barriers to the international trade. 
 
(viii) Standards, technical regulation s, and sanitary and phytosanitary 
measures  
 
(b) Sanitary and phytosanitary measures 
 WTO/TPR/S276, p.42, para 60 
 Section III, paragraph 60 of the Secretariat report states that the Act on Domestic Animal 
Infectious Diseases Control is one law governing measures on SPS.   Question: 
5. Can Japan comment on the practice of re-tes ting of animals in post-arrival quarantine 
and to what extent this might be perm itted within the Act on Domestic Animal 
Infectious Diseases Control? 
 
RESPONSE: Regarding animals imported to Japan, Japan conducts an import quarantine 
inspection for a certain period of time. The peri od of time for import quarantine inspection is 
determined according to Article 50 of the Ordinance for the Enforcement of the Act on   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 141 
 
 
 Domestic Animal Infectious Diseases Control (e.g. for cloven- hoofed animals: 15days, for 
equine animals: 10days, etc.). However, the Ordi nance also stipulates that the quarantine period 
for animals could be extended; for example, imported animals which have contracted an infectious disease are quarantined until there is  no risk of spreading the infectious disease. 
Therefore, under the legislations, the period or  inspection could vary depending on diseases and 
the results of testing.    
 
WTO/TPR/S276, p.43, para 64 
 Section III, paragraph 64 of the Secretariat re port that regulations under the Plant Quarantine 
Act were revised during the period under review.   Question:  
6. Can Japan please outline its current review of  systems to audit inspections, including 
any reduction in audit inspection time periods of plants subject to inspection at growing 
sites in exporting countries. 
 
RESPONSE:  With regard to review of system to a udit inspections, Japan has been considering 
what kind of conditions should be applied to th e exporting countries to reduce the frequency of 
visits.  SECTION IV: TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
 
1) AGRICULTURE 
 
(i) Structure  
WTO/TPR/S276, p.73, para 2 
 Section IV, paragraph 2 of the Secretariat repor t notes that one aim of Japan’s Basic Law on 
Food, Agriculture and Rural Areas is to achieve a higher self-sufficiency ratio.  
 
Question:  
7. Can Japan explain how the self-sufficiency ratio is measured and comment on how 
successful the law has been in achieving this particular goal? 
 
RESPONSE:  The total food self-sufficiency ratio on a calorie supply basis is calculated from 
the following formula.  The self-s ufficiency ratio of livestock and its products is calculated 
taking the self-sufficiency ratio of feed into consideration.  Ratio = (Quantity of domestic calorie supply / total calorie supply) x 100 (calorie basis) 
 
The food self-sufficiency ratio continued declining up to the end of 1990’s, while in recent years 
the ratio has been in th e range of 39% to 41%. 
 
WTO/TPR/S276, p.73, para 2, 5;  
 Section IV, paragraph 4 of the Secretariat report notes that the agricultural sector in Japan 
continues to receive substantia l government support, with OECD estimates of “total support” at 
1.1% of GDP primarily through market price s upport, and in addition hi gh tariffs.  However, 
Section I, paragraph 9 of Japan’s Trade Policy Review Report states that “Japan has long made 
efforts to lower trade barriers under that [the WTO] system”. 
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 142 
 
 
 Questions:  
8. Can Japan please explain what efforts have been made to lower trade barriers in 
agriculture during the review period?  
 
RESPONSE: Japan, as the world’s largest net-food impor ter of agricultural products, has been 
constructively participating in the agricultu re negotiations under the Doha Development 
Agenda, calling for a balanced outcome which is acceptable for all Members.  Concerning FTAs/EPAs the bilateral EPA with In dia entered into force in August 2011 and 
with Peru in March 2012, and Japan launched ne gotiations on EPAs with  Mongolia, Canada and 
Colombia in 2012.  
9. Can Japan explain how it reconciles its goa l of reducing trade barriers with the 
following: 
 The substantial government support th at the agriculture sector in Japan 
continues to receive; and 
 The Basic Plan for Food, Agriculture a nd Rural Areas, which aims to increase 
Japan’s food self-sufficiency  ratio to 50%, through inter alia the income 
support direct payment scheme, as explai ned in paragraph 86 of Japans’ Trade 
Policy Review report. 
 
RESPONSE: Japan has been implementing substantia l reductions in tariffs and domestic 
support since the conclusion of the Uruguay Rou nd and is now the largest net-food importing 
country in the world. Japan will continue to pr omote the structural reform of agriculture, 
including strengthening coordination between the food manufacturing sector and the agricultural sector, and consolidation of farmland, et c. in accordance with  WTO Agreements. 
 
WTO/TPR/S276, p.73, para 5; p.74, para 6 
 
Section IV, paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Secr etariat report note that “consumer prices of 
agriculture products in Japan are considerably hi gher than the OECD av erage”. The report also 
notes that Japan has extended its pilot direct-pay ment programme on rice to other agricultural 
crops. 
 
Questions:  
 
10. Can Japan please comment on the effect on the Japanese consumer of paying 
considerably higher prices for agricultural prod ucts, in particular in terms of their access 
to a variety of affordable foodstuffs? 
 RESPONSE:  The Basic Law on Food, Agriculture and Ru ral Areas stipulates in Article 2.2, as 
one of the key policy objectives, “a stable s upply of good-quality food at reasonable prices shall 
be secured for the future”. As a result of polic y reforms based on this Law, for example, the 
consumer price of rice has fallen by more than 20% in nominal terms compared to the 1990’s. 
 
11. Can Japan please explain how this direct payment programme is applied, including 
whether or not the application is consiste nt across the range of crops it applies to? 
 
RESPONSE: In 2011, the eligibility criteria of paymen ts for products other than rice were 
relaxed to the same level as that for rice and therefore the payments are now applied with a 
consistent eligibility criteria across commodities:  all farmers who produce for the purpose of 
selling their products are eligible. (Farmers  who produce only for self-consumption are not 
eligible.)  
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 143 
 
 
 (ii) Border measures 
 
WTO/TPR/S276, p.74, para 8 
 
Section IV, paragraph 8 of the Secretariat report notes that Ad Valorem Equivalents (AVEs), 
which tend to involve relatively high tariffs, “were not available for 102 lines at the HS 
nine-digit level; these include milk and dairy pr oducts, live swine and meat of swine, rice and 
cereals, fruit juices, groundnuts and th eir oil, and prepared foods.” 
 
Questions: 
12. Can Japan please explain why the Ad Valorem Equivalent (AVEs) were not made 
available for these 102 lines?  
13. In the interest of transparency, can Japan please provide AVEs for the 102 lines? 
 
RESPONSE: Ad valorem equivalents (AVEs) of non- ad valorem duties are automatically 
calculated with import value and volume. AVEs of specific duty can be calculated by the 
following formula; “specific duty on an item / (import value / import quantity) ×100(%). 
Therefore, AVEs of some tariff lines cannot be provided when there are no import or de minimis imports of the lines in the year.  
WTO/TPR/S276, p.75, para 9; 
 
Section IV, paragraph 9 of the Secretariat re port notes the very low quota-fill in 2010 for both 
butter and butter oil in Japan, but also notes a co mparison of a 99.3% fill for dairy products for 
general use.   
 
14. Can Japan provide information on the signifi cantly wide variation in these quota-fills 
given that the 99.3% quota fill of the dair y products for general use demonstrates a 
demand for dairy products in Japan in general? 
 
RESPONSE: The imports of the TRQ for “designated dairy products for general use” are 
implemented by state-trading with a view to  stabilizing supply-demand for dairy products. The 
quota-fill of the TRQ has been nearly full every year and imports of the TRQ play a major role in stabilizing supply and demand situa tions in the domestic market.   
 All the other TRQs on dairy products are for pr ivate importers and a part of these TRQs is 
under-filled as the domestic consumption related to  these TRQs has been declining. Concerning 
unused quotas, a scheme of reallocation has already been implemented.  
(iii) Domestic measures 
 
WTO/TPR/S276, p.78, para 14, pg.79, para 17 
 Section IV, paragraph 14 of the Secretariat report notes that the Japanese Government has programmes to promote exports of food and agri culture, forestry, and fishery products, with a 
target of reaching ¥1 trillion by 2020.  Section IV, paragraph 17 of the Secretariat report notes 
The Japan Dairy Council (a producer group) has been voluntarily restricting the overall 
production of raw milk since 1979, with a pr oduction cap of 7.4 million tonnes for FY2012.  
 Question: 
15. With reference to these Japanese government  export promotion programmes, how does 
Japan see the implementation of the Japan Dairy Council’s voluntary restrictions on 
production of raw milk?  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 144 
 
 
 16. What impact does Japan see this voluntary programme having on its ability to meet the 
¥1 trillion by 2020 goal? 
 RESPONSE: The Japan Dairy Council voluntarily sets every year its target volume of raw 
milk production, based on yearly demand incl uding export demand, although it is very 
small. So the existence of the voluntary programme does not have an impact on the ability to meet the \1 trillion target.  
 2) FISHERIES (i) Profile and recent developments 
 
WTO/TPR/S276, p.80, para 22 
 Section IV, paragraph 22 of the Secretariat repor t notes that in 2008 60% of Japan’s total fishery 
workers were 55 years or older. 
 
Question:  
17. Does the Japanese government have any plans in place to attract more workers to the 
fisheries industry given the importance of this industry to the Japanese consumer (with a per capita consumption of 56kgs)? 
 
RESPONSE: The Government of Japan provides supports to programs for training and 
employment of fishery workers, as well as on-site long-term fishery training programs.  WTO/TPR/S276, p.83, para 32 
 Section IV, paragraph 32 of the Secretariat report notes following the March 2011 earthquake 
and tsunami, there are a number of subsidies available under a large-scale disaster recovery programme for relief and reconstruc tion of the fisheries industry. 
 Question:  
18. Can Japan provide further information about these subsidies, particularly: 
‐ Are the subsidies time-bound? 
‐ Are they limited by geographical area or fishery? 
‐ Will they lead to an increase in fish ing capacity in the affected area? 
‐ What measures has Japan put in place to  ensure that these subsidies do not 
contribute to illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing, overfishing, or 
fishing for overfished stocks? 
 
RESPONSE:  Each program is time-bound and a specific target year is established by subject, 
e.g. ports and other facilities. 
-They are limited to the fishing ports and faciliti es located in areas damaged by the earthquake 
and tsunami.  -The aim is to recover the fishing capacity lost by the disaster. -While programs for the recovery have been in  progress, the resource management frameworks 
established before the disaster are valid and contributing to reducing and eliminating 
overcapacity, overfishing and IUU fisheries.  
 WTO/TPR/S276, p.84, para 33 
 
Section IV, paragraph 33 of the Secretariat report notes that Japan continues to provide a wide 
range of fisheries subsidies to the sector nationally.     WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 145 
 
 
 Question:  
19. Can Japan explain how it reconciles its goa l of reducing trade barriers with the 
extensive government funding to the fisheries sector? 
 
RESPONSE: The government funding in Japan is provi ded accordance with international rules. 
Therefore, there is no contradiction between the government funding to fisheries sector and the trade in fisheries products. 
 
WTO/TPR/S276, p.84, para 34 
 
Section IV, paragraph 34 of the Secretariat re port notes that a considerable amount (¥97,551 
million) is allocated under Japan’s budget to various fisheries assistance and management 
programmes.  However, section IV, paragraph 29 of the Secretariat report notes that 40% of 
Japan’s fisheries resources (34 stocks) are at low levels according to a 2010 stock assessment. 
 
Question:  
20. Can Japan please comment on any plans to reform the amount or type of the subsidies it 
provides for fisheries assistance and manageme nt programmes to help to rebuild these 
stocks? 
 
RESPONSE: Japan has various programs, including subsidies as stated in paragraph 35 of the 
Secretariat’s Report, for the conservation and ma nagement of fish stocks, including scientific 
research, technology development, resource enha ncement, and monitoring and enforcement. 
Their results and effects are regularly reviewed and evaluated. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 146 
 
 
 17. INDIA 
Trade Policy Review of Japan  
(19 and 21 February 2013)  
QUESTIONS FROM INDIA 
 
Part I : QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SECRETARIAT REPORT  
Page 50 (Para 100) 
The various incentives provided by Japan are detailed in the Special Taxation Measures Law, 
which set out 311 special tax measures (in FY2012) involving, inter alia, accelerated 
depreciation, tax credits, and reduced tax rates.  
 
Question 1  
Could Japan provide details of the of the diffe rent tax incentive schemes it has put in place for 
achieving various policy objectives like addressi ng environmental concerns or promoting 
R&D, and the industry/sectors benefitting from such schemes? RESPONSE: 
With regard to details of the tax incentive schem es of each of the last 4 years, please refer to 
the following websites. http://www.mof.go.jp/english/tax_pol icy/tax_reform/fy2010/tax2010a.pdf  
(FY 2010 Tax Reform) 
http://www.mof.go.jp/english/tax_pol icy/tax_reform/fy2011/tax2011a.pdf  
(FY 2011 Tax Reform) 
http://www.mof.go.jp/english/tax_pol icy/tax_reform/fy2012/tax2012a.pdf  
(FY 2012 Tax Reform) 
http://www.mof.go.jp/english/tax_pol icy/tax_reform/fy2013/tax2013a.pdf  
(FY 2013 Tax Reform) 
Page 22 (Para 3)  
10th Time Release Survey (TRS) by Japanese Cust oms indicates that the average time between 
arrival of goods and granting of import permission has come down.   Question 2  
Whether the TRS is based on clearance time at  all ports and of all goods or whether any 
sampling method has been used? Whether the Stud y captures the data of the time taken for 
release of goods from the Port after the grant of  import permission and if so, what is the time 
taken for the same? 
 
RESPONSE: 
TRS is based on the sampling method. The data was taken from random samples of the import 
declaration in the selected ports during the certain period of time. 
The objective of the TRS is only the duration of time from the entry of the goods into the port 
to the grant of import permission.  
Page 22 (Para 4,5) 
Mention is made regarding the scheme of AE Os and also that AEOs can file import 
declarations in advance of cargo arrivals.  
Question 3  
Whether any assessment has been made as to what percent of the importers use the AEO 
facility and if the percent is not very high, what constraints prevent them from using the 
facility. 
 
RESPONSE: There is no AEO facility in Japan, theref ore, no such assessment has been made.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 147 
 
 
 Page 22 (Para 6) 
It is reported that advance rulings are publishe d at the request of importer on customs website 
but these are not binding.  
Question 4 
How an advance ruling benefits an importer if  the same is not binding? Also, in case of 
non-implementation of the advance ruling by the customs authorities, what is the mechanism to resolve the dispute? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Japan Customs does issue binding rulings at the request of the importers or other interested 
persons, fully complying with Standard 9.9 and guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention and such rulings are honored by Jap an Customs. Even though importers have a 
choice of whether to use that advance ruling in th e import declaration procedure, if they use it, 
Customs officials have to follow it and cannot ignore it. 
 
【Standards9.9 of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
The customs shall issue binding rulings at the re quest of the interested person, provided that 
the Customs have all the information they deem necessary. 
【Guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
In some administrations, they may be legally bi nding and provided for in national legislation, 
whereas in others there may simply be a co mmitment by the Customs to honor the ruling. 
 Japan would like to correct the last sentence in Paragraph 6, page 22 of the Report as follows: 
At the request of importers and other concerne d parties, Japan issues written advance rulings. 
Such rulings are honored by Customs at the tim e of import declarations, and published on the 
Customs website for the reference for the public.  Page 23 (Para 7) 
It is reported that a common portal has been created for next generation single window. 
 
Question 5 
India requests Japan to give more information regarding its Single Window such as whether all regulatory agencies transmit information online, which is the nodal agency to operate the 
single window, and what gains have been made in terms of saving of time in goods clearance 
because of the single window.  RESPONSE: 
A. In addition to customs procedures, users can transmit and receive information on various 
laws and ordinances online   
Available laws and ordinances include: 
 
・Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act  
・Food Sanitation Act 
・Quarantine Act 
・Plant Protection Act 
・Act on Domestic Animal Infectious Diseases Control 
・Exchange and Foreign Trade Act 
・Act on Port Regulations 
・Ports and Harbors Act 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 148 
 
 
 The main system of the single window, NACCS (Nippon Automated Cargo and Port 
Consolidated System), is managed and operated  by NACCS Center which is a stock company. 
 Therefore, Japan Customs does not collect the data on the time saved as a result of the 
implementation of single window. 
 Page 66-67 (Para 170) 
Japan is a signatory to the ACTA. 
 
Question 6 
Kindly elaborate on the mechanism adopted to pr event seizure/ detention of goods which enter 
Japanese ports in-transit to third party destinations  which may not be infri nging IPRs either in 
the country of origin or in the country of destination. 
 
RESPONSE: 
Japan Customs has the authority to conduct en forcement activity on transit goods which are 
suspected to be infringing IPRs in Japan.  Page 60 (Chart III. 12) 
There has been an increase in the number of pate nts granted even while the number of patent 
applications filed has decreased.  
 
Question 7 
What are the reasons for increase in the number of patents granted even while the number of 
patent applications filed has decreased? Is it possible that the patentability criteria have 
undergone a liberal interpretation leading to an increase in grant of patents? 
 
RESPONSE: 
As a result of increasing the number of patent exam iners, Japan has seen a rise in first office 
actions as well as final office actions. Along with this change, the number of patents granted 
has increased. The Japan Patent Office has not made any modifications to the patentability 
criteria that would lead to an increase in grant of patents. 
 Page 59 (Para 135-136) 
It has been stated that Japan has sought to make the patent system more attractive and 
user-friendly to both domestic and foreign user s. However, the World Intellectual Property 
Indicators published by the WIPO show that in 20 11 non-residents share in Patent applications 
in Japan was only 16.1% (15.8% in 2010) as compared to 50.8% (50.6% in 2010)and 21.0% (25.1% in 2010) for the USA and China, respectiv ely which were the two largest recipients of 
patent applications. The JPO granted the largest number of patents in 2011. However the share 
of non-residents was only 17.1% (15.9% in 2010) as compared to 51.6% (50.9% in 2010) and 34.7% (41.0% in 2010) for US and China, respectively. 
 
Question 8 
What are the steps undertaken to make the pate nt system more user-friendly to non-residents, 
since the position emerging does not reflect any im pact in the form incr eased use of the patent 
system by non-residents?    RESPONSE: 
Japan is working on making the patent system further user-friendly for all applicants regardless 
of whether they are residents or non-residents.  
As one of the measures taken in particular fo r non-residents, the Japan Patent Office has 
started to accept inquiries on the Japanese industrial property system or the status of specific   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 149 
 
 
 applications, etc., via e-mail. Furthermore, sin ce 1 April 2012, a remedy has been introduced 
for failure to comply with the time limit for submission of translations. 
Japan intends to continue to work on achieving a patent syst em that is user-friendly and 
attractive for all applicants regardless of wh ether they are residents or non-residents. 
 
Page 67 (Para 172) 
Japan is a member of the WCT and the WPPT. Both these treaties incorporate provisions on 
prevention of circumvention of technological protection measures which are considered to be 
TRIPS plus. 
 
Question 9 
How these provisions as incorporated in the Copy right Act have worked since their enactment? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Significant progress has been made in the fiel d of digitization and networking since 1999 
when the previous legal provisions regarding technological protection measures were set out. 
Many families now own DVD recorders or TVs with built-in hard-disks. If the issue of 
copying DVDs by removing cryptographic prot ection were left una ttended, the economic 
benefits of copyright holders, etc., would be unf airly damaged. Therefore, in the amendments 
of the Copyright Act in 2012, in addition to protection technologies that are covered by 
technological protection measures for copy right (technologies based on signal-addition 
methods that are used for VHS and other formats), cryptographic technologies (technologies that are used for DVD and other formats) ha ve also become covered by technological 
protection measures, and provisions to regulate the evasion of technological protection measures based on cryptographic technologies have been created. 
 
Page 87 (Para 45) 
Some post-2008 financial crisis measures are s till in force. For example the prohibition of 
naked short selling, which was time bound (6 mont hs), was renewed 11 times and is still in 
force. Similarly, the Financial Instrument Ac t, which regulates over-the-counter transactions, 
has been revised so that all transactions on derivatives are subject to FSA supervision. 
Operators of such transactions have been obliged  to use the clearing system, so as to allow the 
FSA to trace their transactions. The regulation on hedge funds has also been reinforced. 
 Question 10 
Give briefs on all post-2008 crisis measures that  are still in force. Para 44 only mentioned 
about the prohibition of naked short selling and the Financial Instrument Act. Some 
information on the regulation on the hedge funds may also be provided. 
 
RESPONSE: 
In December 2008, the “Act on Special Measure s for Strengthening Financial Functions” was 
revised in order to better support SMEs and re gional economies facing severe situations after 
the financial crisis. In 2009, the “Act on Tem porary Measures to Facilitate Financing for Small 
and Medium-Sized Enterprise, etc.” was enact ed in order to ensure facilitation of SME 
businesses. 
 With regard to hedge funds, under the Financ ial Instruments and Exchange Act, operators 
selling hedge funds are required to file with the FSA as a Financial Instruments Business. 
These operators are subject to the request of reports, inspection and supervision by the FSA. 
In addition, business management operators of he dge funds are required to file with the FSA as 
an Investment Management Business. Their oblig ation as an Investment Management Business 
includes the delivery of investment reports to investors. 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 150 
 
 
 Page 101 (Para 81) 
Establishment in the third sector covered by th e GATS, aircraft repair and maintenance, is 
subject to a non-discriminatory economic needs test, which has been scheduled in both the 
GATS and the EPA commitments. 
 
Question 11 
Specify the criteria and elements of the economic needs test for aircraft repair and maintenance 
services. 
 
RESPONSE: 
One of the requirements that is imposed on an MRO (Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul) 
which intends to operate in Japan is that “the capability of manufacturing or repairing aircraft 
or specific equipment does not become notably excessive based on given permission” (provisional translation), according to the Artic le 2-5 of the Aircraft Manufacturing Industry 
Act. However, such requirements are imposed equally both on domes tic and foreign MROs. 
Therefore, the requirements are not to be imposed on foreign MROs in a discriminate manner. 
 
Page 101 (Para 82) 
A restructuration of the landing fees schedule is also envisaged, in order to give preference to 
small and medium-size aircraft, promote the deve lopment of low-cost carriers, and advance the 
open sky policy. 
 Question 12 
Could Japan provide the details of its open sky policy? 
 
RESPONSE: Basic policy regarding open skies is to liberali ze the transportation between the two countries 
at Narita airport and to liberalize the trans portation between the two countries and to points 
beyond including airports located outside the To kyo metropolitan area. In addition, Japan will 
make its decisions strategically from the st andpoint of its own national interests while 
considering partner countries in terms of factors like market size, growth, their 
forward-thinking approach to liberalization, an d the potential for new entrants and increase of 
services. 
 Page 101 (Para 83) 
Japan has no specific policy for all-cargo services (e.g. laxer ownership criteria, and on the 
granting of fifth and seventh freedom rights) altho ugh elimination of the restrictions on change 
of gauge is envisaged in order to boos t freight cargo traffic to and from Japan. 
 Question 13 
Could Japan provide details about what fr eedom rights are given to which countries? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Basic policy regarding open skies is to libera lize third and fourth freedom traffic rights 
between the two countries at Narita airport and to liberalize third, fourth and fifth freedom traffic rights between two countries at air ports outside the Tokyo metropolitan area. In 
addition, Japan will make its decisions strate gically from the standpoint of its own national 
interests while considering partner countries in terms of factors like market size, growth, their 
forward-thinking approach to liberalization, an d the potential for new entrants and increase of 
services. 
 Page 103 (Para 86) 
Other elements of this new liberal policy are the relaxation of charter rules (forwarder charter and split charter are more easily approved) and fares regulations.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 151 
 
 
 Question 14 
Could Japan provide information about what re laxation of Charter rules are given under the 
new liberal policy? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Japan could provide information about that if  details of the requested information are 
specified. 
 Page 106 (Para 96 Table IV.18, Regulatory Framework (i))) 
Construction companies require: a Construction Business Licence except for those intending to undertake contracts for “simple construction work”.  Question 15 
Could Japan provide the criteria for deciding what constitute ‘Simple Construction Work’? 
 
RESPONSE:  
Below are the criteria for “Simple construction work” (Article 1-2 (1) of the Order for 
Enforcement of the Construction Business Act (Cabinet Order No. 273 of 1956)). (i) For General Building, (a) Construction work whose total contract  amount is less than 15 million yen; or 
(b) Building of a wooden house whose total fl oor-area is less than 150 square meters. 
(ii) For other construction works, construction wo rk whose total contract amount is less than 5 
million yen. 
 
Part II: Other Questions  
 
Question 16 
From 1st August, 2012 Japan has introduced a mandatory testing of imports for residue of the pesticide Ethoxyquin in the consignment of sh rimp imports.  The threshold level prescribed 
for the residue of the pesticide is 0.01 ppm.  It may be clarified whether the default standard 
of 0.01 ppm of Ethoxyquin is based on scientific  study carried out by Japan?  If not, then 
what is the basis of adopting this standard?  
 
RESPONSE: 
When Japan introduced the positive list system for agricultural chemicals in 2003, there was 
no Codex MRL set for Ethoxyquin in shrimp and major foreign countries did not have national 
MRLs for this compound in shrimp. In addition,  no request was made by domestic industries 
to set a specific MRL for shrimp. This is the reason that there is no MRL for Ethoxyquin in shrimp in Japan. As a result, the uniform level (which India calls the default standard) 0.01 
ppm is applied.  The uniform level was set as the amount unlikel y to cause damage to human health, based on 
the acceptable exposure levels evaluated by JECFA (Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on 
Food Additives) and US FDA (Food and Drug Admi nistration). The level is the same as the 
EU default level.  
Prior to the setting of the uniform level, Japan notified the WTO members based on the SPS 
Agreement. Japan considers that there was no procedural problem for the setting of the 
uniform level.  
In addition, Japan is reviewing the current MRLs for Ethoxyquin in shrimp. Since the Food 
Safety Commission of Japan (FSC) has raised a concern on potential genotoxicity during the 
risk assessment, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) is carrying out 
additional studies to obtain the data on genotoxicity. The FSC intends to proceed with risk WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 152 
 
 
 assessment based on the study results by the MHLW. Japan will make a response to this 
matter as promptly as possible upon receiving the assessment results from the FSC.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 153 
 
 
 18. CHINESE TAIPEI 
 
WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF 
TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU 
 PART I: ON REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT (WT/TPR/S/276) 
 
IV. I.  ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT 
V. (1)  MAIN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS 
Page 2 (Para 3): To be able to sustain growth in the medium to longer term, domestic demand will need to 
continue to drive growth.  Other challenges to longer term growth include very high public 
debt, the rapidly aging population, and deflation.  To ove rcome these challenges, the Japanese 
economy will need to undergo structural reforms, inter alia,  to improve productivity in the 
services sector, reform the labour market, and reform taxation. 
 
Question(s): 
1. Does Japan have new policies in the services sector? 
 RESPONSE:  Japan is determined to further promote the liberalization of services sectors both 
domestically and internationally, based on th e recognition that the overseas expansion and 
liberalization of the service industries would lead to the improvement of their productivity.  
 2. If so, do they require more deregulation in this sector than current policies? 
 
RESPONSE:  Under the new administration, regulatory reform, including the services sector, is 
one of the top priority issues. The recently re-established Regulatory Reform Council will focus 
its efforts on realizing regulatory reform.   
VI. (2)  MACROECONOMIC POLICIES 
Page 2 (Para 4): 
As indicated in the Report, under the Basic Gu idelines for Reconstruction in Response to the 
Great East Japan Earthquake, reconstruction is to  be financed through a combination of reduced 
government expenditures, non-tax reve nues, and temporary tax measures. 
 Question(s): 
3. What are the temporary tax measures referred to in the Report?   
 
RESPONSE: 
(National Tax ） 
Special Corporation Tax for Reconstruction 
・ Introduce temporary 10% surtax levied on a co rporation’s corporate income tax liability, 
while implementing FY 2011 Tax Reform (re ducing effective tax rate and broadening 
corporation tax base). 
・ 3 years from FY2012 to FY2014 (about 0.8 trillion yen/ year) 
Special Individual Income Tax for Reconstruction 
・ Introduce temporary 2.1% surtax levied on an  individual’s individual income tax liability. 
・ 25 years from January 2013 to December  2037 (about 0.3 trillion yen/ year) 
 
(Local Tax) 
・ Temporarily add 500 yen to the standard tax rate of the flat rate of both the municipal 
inhabitants tax and prefectural inhabitants tax. 
・ 10 years from FY2014 to FY2023 (about 0.6 trillion yen/year) WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 154 
 
 
 4. How will these measures help to reduce the pressure on pension and health care expenditure 
for Japan’s aging population? 
 RESPONSE:  These measures were adopted for Reconstruction.  
 
VII. II.  TRADE POLICY REGIME: FRAMEWORK AND OBJECTIVES 
VIII.  (1)  TRADE POLICY OBJECTIVES 
Page 10 (Para 3): 
 Currently Japan has 12 bilateral trade agreemen ts and one regional agreement (with ASEAN).  
Japan is currently negotiating bilateral FTA s (EPAs) with the Gulf Cooperation Council 
(Bahrain, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Om an, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates), 
Australia, and Mongolia.  Since June 2008, Japan has been holding working-level consultations to "consider and create a favourable environment for the resumption of negotiations" with the Republic of Korea.  Japan also participates in the Asia-Pacific 
Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum and in other re gional trade fora, such as the Asia-Europe 
meeting (ASEM), the ASEAN+3, and the East Asian Summit.  Japan officially encourages 
foreign direct investment (FDI).  However, in recent years, inward FDI into Japan has 
remained low (Chapter I).  
 
Question(s): 
5. What is the main reason for foreign direct i nvestment (FDI) having remained low in recent 
years? 
 
RESPONSE: It is difficult to specify such reason as  Chinese Taipei mentions. In any case, the 
Government of Japan has implemented a variety of policies to give incentives to inward FDI. 
Those policies are summarized as the "Program  for Promoting Japan as an Asian Business 
Center and Direct Invest into Japan".  Please refe r to the website below for the contents of the 
Program: http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program.pdf 
The follow-up of the Program was conducted in June 2012. 
http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program-followup.pdf  
 
In addition, In order to show Japan’s willingn ess to welcome FDI into Japan, the Government of 
Japan is working on proactive public relations through its diplomatic missions overseas and 
Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO)’s overseas offices.  (ii) Transparency and policy evaluation Page 13 (Para 8): 
 
Under the Government Policy Evaluations Act (GPEA) and the Basic Guidelines for 
Implementing Policy Evaluation, the Cabinet Office and ministries are required to evaluate their 
own policies before and after implementation and to publish the results of these evaluations.  
In certain cases, ministries and agencies are required to conduct ex-ante regulatory impact 
analyses, to be presented when soliciting "pub lic comments" before the Cabinet makes a 
decision to introduce, abolish or change regulati ons.  Since 2007, draft laws or draft cabinet 
orders to enact, revise or abolish regulations mu st be evaluated by ex-ante regulatory impact 
analyses (RIAs), the results of which must be pub lished.   However, not all bills are subject to 
ex-ante RIAs, for example an ex-ante RIA was not conducted on the draft bill on the reform of the Japan Post Office.  Additionally, existing re gulations and measures that are not subject to 
amendment or abolition are not subject ex-ante RIAs.  Thus, the costs and benefits of protection from various tariffs and or other trade policy measures are not evaluated by the 
Government. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 155 
 
 
 Question(s):  
6. How is it determined which draft bills are subject to ex-ante RIAs and which are not? 
 RESPONSE: The Cabinet Office and ministries are required to conduct ex-ante evaluation of 
regulations (any effects of restricting the rights of the public or imposing obligations on the 
public) when introducing, revising, or abolishing  regulations by enactment, or the revision or 
abolition of a law or a Cabinet Order. This is pr escribed by No. 6, Article 3 of the Cabinet Order 
for Enforcement of the Government Policy Evaluation Act. 
URL：http://www.soumu.go.jp/main_sosiki/hyouka/seisaku_n/pes.html 
 
7. Who has the authority to decide whether or not a draft bill is subject to an ex-ante RIA?  
 RESPONSE: Please refer to the answer to Question 6 from Chinese Taipei. 
 
(2) TRADE AGREEMENTS AND ARRANGEMENTS 
(ii) Regional trade agreements Page 14 (Para 1): 
 
Japan has an ambitious programme for expanding  its already relatively large network of 13 
RTAs.  The authorities note that Japan's policy on RTAs is to pursue high-level economic 
partnerships strategically and from several perspec tives, with a wide range of countries, such as 
major trading partners.  According to th e Basic Policy on Comprehensive Economic 
Partnerships, the Asia-Pacific region is of particular importance for Japan, politically, 
economically, and with regard to security.  Japan will increase its efforts to promote and 
conclude ongoing bilateral EPA negotiations, su ch as with Australia; it will work towards the 
realization of the China-Japan-Korea FTA , and the Regional Comprehensive Economic 
Partnership (RCEP) among others.  Further afield , it will expedite talks with the EU to enter 
into negotiations and will work actively to st rengthen its economic part nerships with other 
Asian economies, newly emerging economies, and resource-rich countries.  Japan has entered 
into consultations with the countries currently negotiating the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) 
Agreement, following an announcement by the Prime Minister in November 2011.  Japan has 
made early announcements to the WTO of ag reements under negotiation with Australia, the 
Gulf Co-operation Council, and Korea.  Accordi ng to the authorities Japan  has also decided to 
launch EPA negotiations with Ca nada, Colombia, and Mongolia. 
 Question(s): 
8. We note that policies regarding the trilater al China-Japan-Korea FTA and the Regional 
Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), in  which Japan is an important player, and 
for which negotiations have been launched, are not mentioned in the TPR Report by the 
Japan Government (WT/TPR/G/276). Could Japan please share with us details of its current policies and the latest developments 
relating to these negotiations? 
 
RESPONSE: Launches of the negotiations of the FTA among Japan, China and Korea and 
RCEP were announced in November 2012. Japan  recognizes that both FTAs will not only 
promote trade and investment among the particip ants but are part of important regional 
undertakings which could contribute to the r ealization of the Free Trade Area of the 
Asia-Pacific (FTAAP). Japan aims to achieve comprehensive and high-level economic 
partnerships.  9. Similarly, we have noted that policies relating to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) 
Agreement are not mentioned in the a bove-mentioned Government Report.  Our 
understanding is that during the elections fo r the House of Representatives in November 
2012, the manifesto of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), now the ruling party, suggested WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 156 
 
 
 that Japan will not join the TPP negotiati ons as long as the partnership adheres to 
across-the-border elimination of tariffs.  We would appreciate knowing more about r ecent developments resulting from internal 
consultations within the LDP and among domestic  shareholders in Japan.  In particular, 
please advise us of the position of the agri cultural groups, as well as the government’s 
stance on this issue both before and after Prim e Minister Shinzo Abe’s recent visit to the 
United States of America?  
 
RESPONSE: Regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnership(TPP), the Government of Japan will 
pursue the path that best serves its national interests, upon thoroughly  examining and analyzing, inter alia, the contents of the consulta tions that have been undertaken thus far as well 
as possible impacts that could arise from participating in the TPP.  The Government of Japan is not in a position to  make comment on stances of relevant parties 
outside the government. 
 
IX. Ⅲ. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE  
X. (1) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS 
(iv) Non-tariff border measures 
(c) Import surveillance 
Page 32 (Para 26): 
 
Japan has in place a system of prior confirma tion to collect data on certain imports.  The 
system is intended to ensure that these im ports are for specific uses, and to verify 
documentation and origin requirements. Prior c onfirmation is required 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 have 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 Protocol;  radioisotopes;  di amonds;  and various other chemicals and 
pharmaceutical products.  Question(s): 
10. What are the guidelines and criteria used fo r defining import products as “high risk”? 
 
RESPONSE: Japan controls imports of certain pr oducts based on Foreign Exchange and 
Foreign Trade Act, for the purpose of achieving the sound development of foreign trade and the 
national economy, sincerely fulfilling obligati ons under the treaties and other international 
agreements Japan has concluded, making Japan's  contribution to international efforts for 
achieving international peace, and main taining peace and security in Japan. 
 
XI.  
XII. (3) MEASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE 
(iv) Intellectual Property Rights 
(c) Industrial property rights 
Patents 
JPO efforts to improving quality and quantity of patent examination 
 
Page 61 (Para 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   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 157 
 
 
 patent applications decreased from 888,198 to 44 8,123 over the same period.  The period of 
the first action pendency was shortened from 28. 7 months in 2010 to 25.9 months in 2011.  
However, this is still a long way from the target of less than 11 months by 2013. 
 
Question(s): 
11. The above-mentioned paragraph in the Report see ms to indicate that first action pendency 
by 2013 will fail to stay within the target ra nge of less than 11 months.  Despite the many 
efforts of the JPO to reduce the pendency period, such as increasing manpower on patent examination, expanding the out-sourcing of pr ior art searches, and adopting paperless patent 
examination, the first action pendency period was shortened by only 2.8 months between 
2010 and 2011.  Have any further feasible methods or strategies been adopted by the JPO or are there plans for other ways of possibly meeting this goal? 
 RESPONSE:  The JPO is expected to achieve the first action pendency of less than 18 months 
by March 2013. Moreover, in order to achieve the goal of the first office action pendency of less 
than 11 months, the JPO will continue to enc ourage the outsourcing of the prior art searches 
while making the best use of about 1,700 patent examiners.  
 
Geographical indications (GIs) 
Page 63 (Para 152):  
“Japan has no GI registration system.  The Commissioner of the National Tax Agency designates places where wines, spirits, and Japan ese Sake are produced if the GI fulfils the 
fundamental principle, i.e. that the wines and spirits 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.”  Question(s): 
12. Given that a number of well-known places of origin in Japan still remain undesignated, does 
the Japanese Government have plans to designa te more places of origin in the foreseeable 
future, particularly for liquors?  
 RESPONSE:  As referred to the notes below, the Commissioner of the National Tax Agency 
has designated the geographical origins of spirits (pot still shochu ) and sake, and the application 
for new designation will be assessed on every receipt of the application of GI. 
[notes] Iki, Kuma  and Ryuku  for pot still shochu in June 2005  
Satsuma  for pot still shochu and  Hakusan  for Japanese sake in December 2005  
 13. In addition, could Japan please elaborate furt her on its assessment procedures and criteria 
used in the designation of places of origin? 
 RESPONSE:  The related public notice stipulates that those who wish to acquire a  GI 
designation are to submit the application for the designation to Regional Taxation Bureaus, 
which are the local branch offices of the Nationa l Tax Agency. On receipt of the application, 
comprehensive assessment of the submitted applica tion will be carried out, based on the criteria 
and the definition of GIs that are provided fo r in paragraph 1 of Article 22 of the TRIPS 
Agreement. 
 
 
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 158 
 
 
 XIII.  IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
XIV.  (5) SERVICES 
(iii) Transport 
(b) Air transport 
Page 101 (Para 82): 
 
A restructuration of the landing fees schedule is al so envisaged, in order to give preference to 
small and medium-size aircraft, promote the deve lopment of low-cost carriers, and advance the 
open sky policy.   
 
Question(s): 
14. What are the specific measures envisaged to en able the restructuring of the landing fees 
schedule?   
 RESPONSE:  The unit landing fee at Japanese airports increases in proportion to an aircraft’s 
weight. Thus advantage is given to small and medium-size aircraft including those owned by 
low-cost carriers.  15. Do landing fees include other expenses, such as air traffic services or noise charges? 
 
RESPONSE:  Noise charges are included in landing fees at Japanese airports. 
 
PART II: GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN REPORT (WT/TPR/G/276) 
 XV. II. TRADE AND INVESTMENT POLICY 
A. (1) OVERVIEW 
Page 7 (Para 13): 
 
The Asia-Pacific region in particular is of importance for Japan, politically, economically, and 
with regard to security, and Japan has a vital inte rest in its being stable and prosperous.  The 
Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP) is an  important initiative that would enable Japan 
to help create a seamless Asia-Pacific region.  Japan will play a leading role in actively 
promoting bilateral Economic Part nership Agreements (EPAs) w ithin the Asia-Pacific region, 
broader regional economic partnerships, and sect oral approaches in the APEC, and will take 
initiatives to formulate trade and investment rules designed for the 21st century in the 
Asia-Pacific region. 
 
Question(s): 
16. In 2010, APEC Leaders approved the statement entitled “Pathways to a FTAAP (Free Trade 
Area of the Asia-Pacific).”  In Japan’s view, should APEC adopt ABAC’s  recommendation that a definite roadmap 
towards the FTAAP should be drawn up?  
 
RESPONSE:  Japan is of the view that APEC should continue to facilitate its role as an 
incubator of a FTAAP and to explore ways fo rward towards its realization by providing 
leadership and intellectual input into the pro cess of its development. In this regard, it is 
important that APEC's work on the next gene ration trade and investment issues needs to be 
further addressed with the aim of incorporating them in negotiations of  pathways toward an 
FTAAP. 
 
17. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is one of the pathways to a FTAAP.  Concrete 
progress has already been made on the expansi on of TPP negotiations, and the inclusion of 
more members would also indicate a larger potential market as well as greater economic 
benefits.    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 159 
 
 
 Is there any possibility of Japan participati ng in the TPP negotiations in the near future? 
 RESPONSE:  Regarding the Trans-Pacific Partnershi p(TPP), the Government of Japan will 
pursue the path that best serves its national in terests upon thoroughly examining and analyzing, 
inter alia, the contents of the consultations that have been unde rtaken thus far as well as possible 
impacts that could arise from participating in the TPP.  
B. (4) OTHER REGIONAL/BILATERAL ARRANGEMENTS 
1. (i) Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) 
Page 11 (Para 24):  
APEC’s core mission continues to be further re gional economic integra tion and expansion of 
trade in the Asia-Pacific region.  APEC h as pursued these objectives in 2011 by addressing 
next-generation trade and investment issues, incl uding through our trade agreements and a Free 
Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP), which is a major instrument to further APEC’s 
regional economic integration agenda .  In this regard, Japan took the lead in identifying and 
promoting effective, non-discriminatory, and mark et-driven innovation policy as one of the next 
generation trade and investment issues.  In ad dition, Japan has been committed to advancing 
APEC green growth objectives.  In 2012, followi ng the Honolulu Declaration, APEC Leaders 
reached a groundbreaking agreement on the APEC Li st of Environmental Goods (54 items) that 
directly and positively contributes to APEC green growth and sustainable development 
objectives, on which we will reduce applied tariff rates to 5% or less by the end of 2015, taking 
into account each economy’s economic circumstan ces, without prejudice to APEC economies’ 
positions in the WTO.  
Question(s): 
18. Japan has been very active in regi onal and international engagement.  
Could Japan please elaborate further on how the APEC agenda helps it to advance domestic regulatory reform and improve overall business environment? 
 
RESPONSE:  Japan shares the view that regulatory reform can boost produc tivity and promote 
job creation while also protecting the environm ent and public health, safety, and security. In 
addition, as trade and investment flows become more globalized, greater alignment in regulatory 
approaches is necessary to prevent needless barri ers to trade from stifling economic growth and 
employment. In this regard, Japan is of the view that the Mid-term Progress Report of Individual Economies’ ANSSR Plan might c ontribute to advancing regulatory reforms.  
 XVI.  IV. JAPAN’S DOMESTIC POLICIES 
XVII.  (1) REGULATORY REFORM 
Page 18 (Para 64): 
 
The next series of the subcommittee and work ing groups were held from September 2010 to 
March 2011.  The agriculture, forestry and re gional development working group replaced the 
agriculture working group.  The subcommittee and its working groups reviewed regulations 
and systems relevant to the "New Growth Strategy " (Cabinet decision in June 2010) and others.  
The subcommittee compiled the second report and the Cabinet identified and decided on 191 items to be reformed in total in April and July  2011 based on the report.  By the same token, 
the third session of the subcommittee was launc hed in September 2011.  The subcommittee 
established three working groups which are (1) the revitalization and reconstruction working 
group, (2) the energy working group, and (3) the agriculture working group.  The subcommittee was upgraded to “The Committee on Regulatory and Institutional Reform” in 
May 2012 in order to reinforce the regulatory a nd institutional reform.  In the same way as the 
previous sessions, the Cabinet identified and deci ded on 142 items to be reformed in total in 
April and July 2012.  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 160 
 
 
 Question(s): 
19. Could Japan please provide us with furt her information on how the Committee on 
Regulatory and Institutional Reform of Japan reviews the existing regulations?  
 
RESPONSE: “The Committee on Regulatory and Institu tional Reform (CRIR)” was terminated 
along with the Government Revitalization Unit in December 2012.  Following the termination of CRIR, the Council for the Promotion of Re gulatory Reform (CPRR) was established in 
January 2013 as an advisory body to the Prime Minister for the purpose of accelerating 
regulatory reforms.   
 
The CPRR will  investigate and deliberate on exis ting regulations through public hearings and 
intense discussion. Based on the investigation an d deliberation, the CPRR will compile a report 
on regulatory reforms through consul tations with ministries in char ge of relevant regulations. 
Several working groups will be established, if  necessary, under the CPRR in order to further 
investigate and deliberate regarding some issues.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 161 
 
 
 19. EU 
EU QUESTIONS 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW OF JAPAN 
 19 and 21 February 2013 
WT/TPR/G/276 
 
II. TRADE AND INVESTEMENT POLICY 
(1) OVERVIEW  
1. Page 6, Para. 1-8 
The report gives an overview of Japan ’s trade and investment policy. 
 
Q1. Could Japan provide information on what  measures exist to encourage, Corporate 
Social Responsibility (CSR) practices under its trade and investment policy? 
 
RESPONSE: 
In the same manner as other countries, Japan is  installing NCP (National Contract Point). 
The CSR Forum Japan, a business initiative advo cating corporate social responsibility, with 
METI support, is cultivating , enhancing  an d promoting  understanding and acceptance of 
CSR practices among Japanese businesses. In a ddition, the Japanese government is supporting 
inclusive business. 
 
2. Page 7, Para. 11 
The report indicates that Economic Partnership Ag reements (EPAs) to which Japan is party 
include elements of Free Trade Agreements and institution-building which cover areas such as 
investment, competition, intellectual propert y rights and human resources development. 
 
Q2: Could Japan provide information on whether other trade related labour (in 
addition to human resources development) or environmental aspects are addressed in 
the aforementioned FTA elements of the EPAs? 
 RESPONSE: 
A. Although there is no independent chapter on the environment or labor in any of Japan’s 
EPA/FTAs, some of them include elements related to these aspects. 
(References) Japan-Switzerland EPA Article 101: Health, Safety and Environmental Measures 
The Parties recognise that it is inappropriate to  encourage investment activities by relaxing 
domestic health, safety or environmental measures or  lowering labour standards. To this effect, 
each Party should not waive or otherwise deroga te from such measures and standards as an 
encouragement for establishment, acquisition or  expansion of investments in its Area. 
 
Q3: Could Japan provide information concerning the content of EPA provisions related 
to human resources development? 
 RESPONSE: 
A. In some of Japan’s EPA/FTAs, human resource development is included as one of the 
fields of cooperation under the chapter on cooperation.  
 
(References) Japan-Malaysia EPA Chapter 12: Cooperation Article 140: Fields of Cooperation 
The fields of cooperation under this chapter shall include: 
(a) agriculture, forestry, fisheries and plantation; WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 162 
 
 
 (b) education and human resource development; 
(c) information and communications technology; 
(d) science and technology; (e) small and medium enterprises; 
(f) tourism; 
(g) the environment; and (h) other fields to be mutually agreed upon by the Governments. 
 
(3) FTA/EPAs 
3. Page 8, Para 20 
The report asserts that Japan has also promoted its regional and bilateral trade policies as means 
of complementing the multilateral trading system , particularly through Economic Partnership 
Agreements which include elements of Free Trade Agreements and institution-building. 
 
Q4: Could Japan inform on the latest state of play and prospects regarding its on-going 
FTAs negotiations? 
 
RESPONSE: 
As for the latest state of play and prospect s regarding its on-going FTAs negotiations, please 
refer to the Japanese Government’s Report (WT/TPR/G/276) in the “TRADE AND 
INVESTMENT POLICY” section (para 8 -21). 
 
III. TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT 
(1) AID FOR TRADE  
4. Page 16, para. 53 
The report states that enhancing capacities on th e supply side and encouraging assistance is 
indispensable for developing countries, including LDCs, to reap further benefit from the multilateral trading system.  
Q5: Could Japan provide information on Jap an’s priorities for the enhancement of 
capacities on the supply side in devel oping countries, particularly LDCs? 
 
RESPONSE: One of the main objectives of Japan’s Aid for Trade Strategy – “Development Initiative for 
Trade” - is to help developing countries enha nce their capacities on the supply side. Japan’s 
assistance activities include implementation of productivity enhancing improvement activities 
for agriculture, forestry and fisheries, support to small and medium-sized enterprises, building 
of roads, energy and port facilities and rela ted technical assistances. Japan supports LDCs 
through projects such as: Income Generation Pr oject for Farmers; the Project for Performance 
Support to Small and Medium Enterprises with Focus on Productivity Improvement; and the Project for Capacity Development of Electric Power Grid. 
 
IV . JAPAN’S DOMESTIC REFORM 
(1) REGULATORY REFORM 5. Page 18, Para. 65 
The report informs that the forth series of the re view on existing regulations and systems by the 
committee began in August 2012 and will continue until June 2013.  
Following the elections, the new LDP-led G overnment has abolished the Government 
Revitalisation Unit (GRU)  
Q6: Could Japan indicate its intentions re garding the functions and roles previously 
carried out by GRU? Can japan confirm that all these functions will be maintained? If 
so, could Japan indicate which institution may take those responsibilities in the future. 
For example, could Japan indicate how w ill the new Council for Regulatory Reform   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 163 
 
 
 take on the work of the Government Revitalisatio n Unit?. If the intention is not to keep 
all the previous functions and roles carried out by GRU, which functions would be 
suppressed and for what reason? Finally, is it the intention that new functions be 
carried out in replacement of GRU?  
 
RESPONSE:  
Since the GRU was established by Cabinet decision in September 2009, it conducted various 
administrative reforms such as the budget screen ing (“Jigyo-Shiwake”, “The Public Project 
Review” (PPR)) and regulation reforms. These have  mostly penetrated the ministries and other 
government agencies. The organizations put them into practice on their own; for example all 
ministries conduct self-inspection of their own projects every year.   In addition, after the GRU was abolished in  December 2012, the Government of Japan 
established the Administrative Reform Prom otion Headquarters and the Council for the 
Promotion of Regulatory Reform in January 20 13. Under these institutions, the Government of 
Japan intends to promote the administrative a nd regulation reforms which the GRU previously 
handled, corresponding to the LDP’s election promise.  
Q7: What will happen to the fourth series of the review on existing regulations which 
the GRU had initiated in August 2012 and we re supposed to continue until June 
2013?Can Japan confirm that previous GRU recommendations (e.g. adopted through 
Cabinet decisions of April and 10th July 2012) shall be implemented?  
 
RESPONSE 
Following the termination of the Committee on Re gulatory and Institutional Reform established 
under the Government Revitalization Unit, the Co uncil for the Promotion of Regulatory Reform 
(CPRR) was re-established in January 2013 as an advisory body to the Prime Minister for the 
purpose of accelerating regulatory reforms.  Notwithstanding the termination of GRU, the relevant ministries are expected to duly 
implement cabinet decisions made in the past. The CPRR will conduct follow-up surveys on the 
implementation of cabinet decisions including those made in April and July 2012. 
 
Q8: What are the responsibilities of the Headquarter for Japan´s Economic 
Revitalization? Has the HJER taken over the role of the GRU? Can Japan confirm that 
the HJER will follow up with the work of the GRU?  What will be the roles of the 
Regulatory Reform Council and of the Government Competitiveness Council? Can 
Japan indicate the composition of these councils? 
 
RESPONSE  : In order to achieve Japan`s economic revitalization as well as to restore a strong 
economy, the Headquarters for Japan´s Economic Revitalization (HJER), in cooperation with 
the Council on Economic and Fiscal Policy, w ill implement specific measures for breaking 
away from deflation and yen appreciation as well as for achieving realization of the growth 
strategy. When it comes to the role of GRU, HJER  has no plans to either take it over or follow 
up on its activities.  The Industrial Competitiveness Council (ICC) is an  investigation and deliberation forum held 
under the HJER to work out and advance th e growth strategy for boosting industrial 
competitiveness, international expansion of industry, etc.  On the other hand, the Council of the Promotion of Regulatory Reform (CPRR) is an advisory 
body to the Prime Minister formed with the obj ectives to investigate and deliberate regulatory 
reforms necessary for socioeconomic restructuring. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 164 
 
 
 The ICC and the CPRR are to collaborate closel y with each other, especially because the 
cooperation between them is essential fo r developing the growth strategy,  
 
(2) GROWTH AND FISCAL CONSOLIDATION 
Page 19, para 72 
 
It is stated that “the Japanese government and the Bank of Japan share the recognition 
that the critical challenge for Japan's ec onomy is to overcome deflation as early as 
possible and to return to a sustainable growth path with price stability”, and that “the 
government and the Bank will work together and make their utmost efforts to address 
this challenge”. In this context the Bank of  Japan has recently decided to implement an 
open-ended program for purchasing ETFs (Exchange traded funds) and REITs (Real Estate Investment Trust) with a view to foster the depreciation of the yen.   
 
Q9: Could Japan provide more information about this plan and its objectives?  
 
RESPONSE The aim of the monetary policy conducted by the Bank of Japan is to overcome deflation as 
early as possible and achieve sustainable ec onomic growth with price stability.  In 
implementing its monetary policy objective, the Bank of Japan does not and will not aim to 
weaken the yen. 
 As for the open-ended asset purchasing method, from January 2014, the Bank of Japan will introduce a method of purchasing a certain amount of financial assets, such as JGBs and T-Bills, 
every month.  For financial assets other than JGBs and T-Bills, such as ETFs and REITs, the 
Bank of Japan will aim to maintain the amount outstanding of these assets under the Asset 
Purchase Program.  If you would like to have more information, please see the statements released on January 22, 2013. (URL: http://www.boj.or.jp/en/annou ncements/release_2013/k130122a.pdf) 
 
(3) INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
Amendments to the Copyright Act 
 Page 21, Para. 82 
The report states that Japan amended its Copyright Act in 2012 with the development of 
digitization and networking. 
 
Q10:  Could Japan indicate whether the amended provisions relating to limitations on 
copyright apply to both the physical and dig ital formats? Are these limitations set out in 
the framework of the three-steps- test in Japanese copyright law? 
 RESPONSE 
Regarding provisions on limitations and excep tions which were newly stipulated in the 
amendments of the Copyright Act in 2012, some provisions are applied without making distinction between physical formats and electr onic formats of copyrighted works, and other 
provisions are applied only to electronic formats of copyrighted works (For example, Article 47 
novies; Exploitation for information processing required for the preparation of offering 
information by using information transmission technology). 
 All of the provisions regarding limitations and ex ceptions which were newly stipulated by the 
amendments of the Copyright Act in 2012 are cons idered to be consistent with the framework 
of the three-steps-test as all of them fall in the category of certain special cases which do not 
conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably pr ejudice the legitimate 
interests of the right holder.    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 165 
 
 
 (5) AGRICULTURAL REFORM  
Page 22, Para. 86   
 
The report states that the new Food, Agriculture and Rural Areas Basic Pl an aims to raise the 
food self-sufficiency ratio to 50% by 2020 
 
Q11:  Could Japan clarify wether this target is maintained under the new Government 
policies? Does Japan consider that such a high ratio is compatible with the efforts to 
liberalise the agriculture generally associat ed with the participation of Japan to 
ambitious FTAs/EPAs?  
 
RESPONSE The target of food self-sufficiency ratio was set in March 2010 as a part of the Basic Plan on 
Food, Agriculture and Rural Areas which provides the mid-term direction of overall agricultural 
policies. The current Plan is still valid as it is  to be revised around every five years. The 
government is proceeding with agricultural po licies based on the Basic Plan, while actively 
engaging in FTA/EPA negotiations.  
 
(7) SERVICES-RELATED POLICIES  
According to the report, a new policy measure on preferential treatment in the immigration 
procedure for foreign professionals was introduced  in May 2012 for the purpose of promoting 
the acceptance of more highly skilled foreign nationals.   
Q12:  May Japan explain how this measure fits together with Japan's notification under 
S/C/N/659? In particular, what are the periods of stay that currently apply to each of 
the categories in Japan's mode 4 GATS commitments? 
 RESPONSE  
Horizontal Commitments of Mode 4 of Japan’s GATS schedule are defined as categories a), 
b) and c). Under the provisions of existing dom estic laws, the category a) corresponds to the 
status of residence of “Intra-company Transferees” with the periods of stay of “3 months”, “1 
year”, “3 years” or “5 years”, the category b) to the status of residence of “Legal/Accounting 
Services” with the periods of stay of “3 month s”,”1 year”, “3 years” or “5 years”, and the 
category c) to the status of residence of “Temporary Visitor” with the periods of stay of ”90days”, “30 days”, “15 days” or less. 
 
If a natural person who falls under the category a) and b) is recognized as “highly skilled 
foreign professionals” as a consequence of applying  for permission of entry and temporary stay 
by utilizing the points-based system, the maximum “5 years” period of stay will be given to him/her uniformly as the preferential treatment. In this sense, this measure fits together with 
Japan’s notification under S/C/N/659. 
 
However, entry and temporary stay of tho se who are recognized as “highly skilled foreign 
professionals” are not covered in the Commitments of Japan’s schedule.  
WT/TPR/S 276  
Summary 
Page viii, Para 15 
According to the report of the WTO secretaria t, about 54% of Japanese Industrial Standards 
(JIS) were aligned to international standards in 2011. While the EU understands that JIS 
standards are voluntary, it is very difficult in Japan to sell a good that does not have the JIS 
mark on it. This can be looked upon as a de facto barrier preventing the access of foreign 
products onto the Japanese market.  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 166 
 
 
 While the EU notes that the Japanese governme nt has provided some justification on the 
deviation of JIS standards from international st andards (e.g. culture, history or climate), it 
seems unlikely that such justifications can acc ount for the high number of JIS standards which 
are not aligned to relevant  international standards. 
 
Q13: What actions has Japan taken, or is planni ng to take to significantly increase the 
percentage of JIS that are aligned to in ternational standards? Could Japan explain in 
concrete terms the actual meaning of "ali gned to international standards"? Does that 
mean that products for which JIS standards ar e aligned to international standards can 
be sold onto the Japanese market without any additional Japan-specific requirements? 
 
RESPONSE: JIS Z 8301: 2011 which regulates rules for the layout and drafting of JIS, 
stipulates “to align with International Standards to the utmost extent possible if there is a 
correspondent International Standard” «4.1 f)», which are the principles for establishing JIS. In fact, 97% of JIS which are comparable to in ternational standards are aligned with them. 
According to the ISO/IEC Guide 21-1, “aligned to international standa rds” means identical 
(IDT) or modified (MOD) to international sta ndards. JIS also conforms with this Guide. 
 
I. ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT (3) STRUCTURAL POLICIES 
Page 4, Para 8 
 
The report provides indication on the need to introduce structural reforms in Japan, including 
with regard to the labour market and dualit y between regular and non-regular workers. 
 
Q14:  Could Japan provide information concern ing the planned reform of the labour 
market, in particular with regard to regular and non-regular workers?   
 
RESPONSE: In order to secure stable employment and fair treatment for non-regular workers, 
the Ministry of Health, Labour and We lfare has taken the following measures:  
i. Revised Worker Dispatch law to enhance pr otection of dispatched workers and to promote 
their stable employment; 
ii. Revised Labour Contract Act to include a new transition framework from fixed-term 
contracts to open-ended contracts in case the fixed-term contract was renewed several times over a long time period, etc.; and 
iii. in addition, the ministry is reviewing measures to address issues concerning part time 
workers’ employment based on the proposal from the Labour Policy Council. 
Apart from these legal amendments, the ministry  has been working on various measures for 
non-regular workers including: 
- introduction of subsidy to the employers for th eir efforts to facilitate non-regular worker’s 
career improvement through measures like conversion from non-regular employment to 
regular employment, human resources de velopment and improvement of working 
conditions; and 
- reinforcement of measures for workers’ skill  building such as improvement of public 
vocational training reflecting non-regular workers’ specific situations. 
 
As a further effort, in response to the supplemen tary resolution to the revised Worker Dispatch 
Law, the ministry is also planning to organize a study group to discuss desirable methods for workers dispatched via the registration method,  workers dispatched in manufacturing and 
specified dispatched workers, and to release a report by the summer in 2013. 
 
Q15:  Could Japan reveal its intentions regardi ng the package of measures focused on 
the improvement of structural char acteristics of the Japanese economy? 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 167 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  It is difficult to respond to this question, because it is unclear about what the EU 
wants to indicate by “structural characteristics”.  
 
II. TRADE POLICY REGIME: FRAMEWORK AND OBJECTIVES 
(1) TRADE POLICY OBJECTIVES 
(ii) Transparency and policy evaluation Page 7, Para. 14  
According to the report, the promotion of transparency is one of Japan’s priorities.   
Q16:   Could Japan indicate its intentions regarding the ratification of the UN 
Convention against corruption? 
 
RESPONSE :The Japanese government obtained the appr oval of the Diet in 2006 to conclude 
the UNCAC. It is now accelerating the preparation for establishing domestic laws in order to 
conclude and implement the Convention at the earliest possible timing.  
 
Page 8, Para 16 
The report notes that Japan’s inward FDI is low compared with other developed countries. 
  Q17 : What are Japan plans to attract more FDIs? 
 
RESPONSE: The Government of Japan has implemented a variety of policies to give 
incentives to inward FDI. Tho se policies are summarized as the "Program for Promoting Japan 
as an Asian Business Center and Direct Invest into Japan".  Please refer to the website below 
for the contents of the Program: 
 
http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program.pdf 
The follow-up of the Program was conducted in June 2012. 
http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program-followup.pdf 
In addition, in order to show Japan’s willingness to welcome FDI into Japan, the Government of 
Japan is working on proactive public relations  through its diplomatic missions overseas and 
Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO)’s overseas offices. 
 
(2) TRADE AGREEMENTS AND ARRANGEMENTS 
(e) other bilateral/regional arrangements 
 Page 18, para 28 
The report mentions the preparatory work fo r the launch of the FTA negotiations between 
China, Japan and Korea.   
Q18: Could Japan describe which areas of economic cooperation are going to be 
covered by the trilateral FTA w ith China and Korea and what  will be the coverage in 
terms of trade of this agreement?  
 
RESPONSE: Although the areas to be negotiated under the FTA among Japan, China and 
Korea are yet to be determined, Japan aims to  conclude a comprehensive and high-level FTA 
consistent with WTO rules.  
 
Page 19, Para. 32 
The Secretariat's report states that according to Japan 's trading partners the continued low level of 
inward FDI may be attributed  inter alia  to "impediments to mergers and acquisitions ". 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 168 
 
 
 Q19:  Do the Japanese authorities intend to take measures to make it easier for foreign 
companies to engage in M&A activities in Ja pan and, if so, which kind of measures are 
they considering? Is Japan planning to intr oduce a legal requirement to have on board of 
companies a certain number of directors indepe ndent from the manage ment?  Is Japan 
planning to revise the tax treatment of cross border and triangular mergers in the near 
future? More generally what are Japan’s plans to reform its legislation corporate governance with the objective of attracting more FDIs?  
 
RESPONSE: At this point, the Government of Japan does not have a plan to reform the 
regulations on mergers and acquisitions under the Companies Act in favor of the foreign 
companies.  
 The Government of Japan is considering a revi ew of the Companies Act to introduce disclosure 
requirements for large companies with regard  to appointment of outside directors. 
 
The tax reform referred to in “FY2013 tax re form” (website below) covers all future tax 
revisions that we can announce at this stage. Th e revisions of the tax treatment of cross border 
and triangular mergers are not included in the “FY2013 tax reform”. http://www.mof.go.jp/english/tax_pol icy/tax_reform/fy2013/tax2013a.pdf  
 
The Government of Japan aims to revitalize business activities in Japan through legislation 
reform for improving corporate governance, which would lead to the promotion of inward FDI. 
 
Page 19, Para 33  
As a part of the Japanese Government's rebuildi ng strategy the Government has  consented to 
the Program for Promoting Japan as an Asian Busi ness Center and Direct Investment into Japan 
.In September 2012, the authorities issued the Innovative Strategy for Energy and the Environment. These policies form the basis of Jap an's energy strategy, which is governed by 
three underlying principles: realization of a societ y not dependent on nuclear power; realization 
of a green energy revolution; and stable supply of  energy. -) In addition to the four strategic 
priorities identified in the National IP Strategi c Programme 2011, the green technology plan is 
part of a long-standing IP-related national strategy . 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 ensure sustaina ble development of the economy. Promoting 
environmental technology is an essential part of Japan's IP, energy, and environment. 
The EU remains the largest investor in Japan, accounting for over 42% of inward FDI in 2011, 
while the United States accounted for over 31%.   
Q20:  In the light of the above, could Japan indicate which incentives it considers 
adopting to attract foreign /domestic investors in green sectors? 
 
RESPONSE:  A taxation system for promoting environment-related investment (“Green 
Investment Tax Break”) was established on June 30, 2011. The scheme, whose purpose is to help ensure stable supplies of energy and cont ribute to the development of a low-carbon growth 
society, will remain in effect until March 31,  2014, and applies to acquisitions of highly 
energy-efficient, lower-carbon equipment used by  enterprises and entrepreneurs. It allows 
taxpayers choices between a 30% special depreciati on (available to corpora tions and individual 
entrepreneur filing blue tax returns, including SMEs) or a 7% tax credit (available only to SMEs).  In fiscal 2012 the taxation system was expa nded to allow immediate depreciation of the 
following assets: photovoltaic and wind power gene ration systems above a certain capacity that   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 169 
 
 
 have been approved under the Act on Special Measures Concerning Proc urement of Renewable 
Energy Sourced Electricity by Electric Utilities. 
 
(i) Regulatory regime 
Pages 19-20, Para. 34 The Secretariat's report notes that in Japan " various laws stipulate restrictions on inward FDI in 
certain sectors ". Indeed Japan has the str ongest equity restrictions on foreigners in the OECD 
area. It appears that Japan is more restrictive in primary industries, manufacturing, transport and 
telecommunications than the OECD average.  
 
Q21:  Are the Japanese authorities planning to li ft these restrictions on FDI or take any 
other measure that would raise the cap of equity participation in the above-mentioned 
sectors? 
 
RESPONSE:  The Government of Japan assumes that primary industries, transport and 
telecommunications sectors play a core role in  underpinning the economy and livelihood of the 
people and are necessary for the maintenance of the fundamental functions of the government such as police, disaster prevention and security. Thus it is inevitable to impose minimum restrictions on foreign companies’ participati on in the aforementioned sectors. The Government 
of Japan recognizes, however, that the restricti ons are minimum and these markets in Japan are 
open to foreign investment adequately. Therefore,  the Government of Japan is not planning to 
lift these restrictions or take any other measures. In the manufacturing sector, the foreign investment is not restricted by individual laws.  
 
III. TRADE POLICY AND PRACTICES BY MEASURES 
(1) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS 
(ii) Tariffs (a) Bound tariffs  Page 23-24, Para. 9 
The report provides details on Japan’s tariff schedule. Given that since April 2002 a zero tariff on liqueurs, vodka, rum and gin (known collectively as 
“white spirits” to distinguish them from “brown spirits”, namely whisky and brandy, to which the 
zero tariff applies on permanent basis) is temporarily applied   
Q22:  Does Japan intend to align the bound tariffs  for “white spirits” to the ones applied 
to “brown spirits”? 
 
RESPONSE: Japan recognizes that the bound tariff rates should be dealt with at the 
comprehensive rounds of WTO negotiations, and that it is not appropriate to answer the 
questions relating to those on specific items such as liqueur, vodka, rum and gin.  
 
Q23: Does Japan have or consider introducing le gislation ensuring the traceability of 
products, in particular alcoholic beverages by requiring them to be marked with the 
original manufacturers’ lot codes and forbi dding the import of products on which these 
have been tampered or erased?   
 RESPONSE: Japan does not have such legislation in  force at the moment. The traceability of 
the distribution of alcoholic beverages is in eff ect ensured as their sale is limited to the licensees 
only and as they are required to keep records of every sales under the Liquor Tax Act.  
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 170 
 
 
 (b) Applied MFN tariff 
Page 25, Para 10 
According to the report, out of 9.168 tariff lines,  93,3% (8.553 lines) involve ad valorem rates. 
But 288 lines (3,14%) carry specific rates compared to 207 lines in 2.010 (2,35%); 58 lines 
carry compound rates (compared to 56 lines in 2.0 10) and 291 lines have alternate rates of duty. 
 
Q24: Does the Japanese Government consid er reforming the tariff structure?  
 
RESPONSE: Japan has at present no such plan  as indicated in the question.  
 
Q25: Since the EU notes that annually Japan est ablishes tariff-rate quotas (TRQs) in 
sectors that do not usually maintain TRQs in  the international framework such as  
footwear,  does Japan intend to modify this system?  
 
RESPONSE: In Japan, tariff rates, including TRQs , are applied to respective products 
appropriately, taking into consideration the stat us of relevant domestic industries. The TRQs 
including that for foot-wear are consistent with  the WTO rules. Therefore, Japan has at present 
no such plan as indicated in the question.  
 
(vii) Government procurement 
Page 33, Para 32 
 
The WTO secretariat notes that Japan's government procurement policy 'is also used as an 
instrument of industrial policy for some sectors and to support SMEs .' 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. The Basic Guideline for Public Procurement of 
information Systems has, therefore, the effect of slicing up public procurement contracts into 
several small pieces even if this is not techica lly necessary making it more difficult for foreign 
companies to compete. 
 
Q26:  Can the Japanese government explain whet her limited tendering and intentional 
contract splitting is GP A compatible and expla in the justification fo r the perpetuation of 
such an approach ? 
 
RESPONSE:  The Government of Japan conducts it s government procurement covered by the 
GPA in a manner consistent with its commitments under the Agreement. 
 
Page 33-37, Para 32-43 
 
The report describes the framework in which pub lic procurements are operated in Japan.  
 
Q27:  Could Japan indicate its plans to furth er open its public procurement market to a 
level comparable with that of its main WTO partners? In this reg ard is Japan planning 
to review the functioning of its operational safety clause?  
 RESPONSE: 
(i) Japan does not consider that the openness of its government procurement market is not 
comparable with that of its main WTO partners. 
 
Its market access level in the GPA is a result of  the negotiations with other GPA parties taking 
into account the overall balance of each Me mber’s market access. Moreover, Japan’s 
government procurement is open not only to GPA parties but to all WTO partners with lower   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 171 
 
 
 threshold and longer bidding period than the GPA under its voluntary measures on government 
procurement. (ii) The applications of the “operational saf ety clause” to procurements are carried out 
appropriately.  
 
viii) Standards, technical regulations a nd sanitary and phyto sanitary measures 
(a) Standards and technical regulations   
Page 37, Para 44 
 
The report mentions the Pharmaceuticals Affairs Law (PAL) as one of the main technical 
regulations applicable in Japan. The Europ ean medical devices industry has had longstanding 
concerns with the fact that the PAL covers both pharmaceuticals and medical devices, even 
though these two types of products are substantially  different. This leads to overly burdensome 
authorisation procedures. Further concerns are related, for example, to differences between 
Japanese Quality Management System (QMS) requ irements and the relevant international 
standard (ISO 13485).  The EU understands that, according to the Cabinet Decision of 10 July 
2012, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welf are (MHLW) is to promulgate legislation 
specifically designed for medical devices, and separate them from pharmaceuticals. According 
to this Decision, MHLW shall, inter alia, consider ways to streamline and accelerate the 
approval of medical devices, and revise the QMS Ministerial Ordinance in order to further 
improve its harmonization to international standards.  
 
Q28: Could Japan indicate the state of play of  this new draft legislation and when it 
will be notified to the WTO TBT Committee? 
 
RESPONSE: The amendment of the Pharmaceutical  Affairs Law is under consideration.  
 
Voluntary standards 
Page 38, Table III.5 
 
The EU notes that not all the figures available for the vast majority of the laws in force are 
indicated. 
 
Q29:  Could Japan provide more comprehensive information?   
 
RESPONSE: For more information, please see the following sites: 
 Pharmaceutical Affairs Law 
- Monographs Specified in the Biological Products Standard    http://www.nih.go.jp/niid/en/mrbp-e.html - Monographs Specified in the Radiopharmaceutical Standard http://wwwhourei.mhlw.go.jp/cgi-bin/t _document.cgi?MODE=hourei&DMODE=CON
TENTS&SMODE=NORMAL&KEYWORD= &EFSNO=634&PAGE=1&FILE=&POS
=0 (in Japanese) 
- Monographs Specified in the Japanese Pharmacopoeia 
   http://jpdb.nihs.go.jp/jp16e/ - Monographs Specified in the Antibodies Standard for Blood Grouping    http://www.japal.org/contents/19940624_579.pdf  (in Japanese) 
   http://www.japal.org/contents/19960416_430.pdf  (in Japanese) 
 Food Sanitation Law 
- Establishment of Specifications and Standards  http://www.ffcr.or.jp/zaidan/FFCRHOME.nsf/pages/e-ESS06 - Food Additives 
 http://www.ffcr.or.jp/zaidan/FFCRHOME.nsf/pages/e-foodadditives 
- Agricultural Chemicals in Food WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 172 
 
 
  http://www.ffcr.or.jp/zaidan/FFCRHOME.nsf/pages/agri-chem 
- Apparatus and Containers/Packages  http://www.ffcr.or.jp/zaidan/FFCRHOME.nsf/pages/appar-pac 
 Electrical Appliance and Materials Safety Law 
http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/S37/S37F03801000085.html (in Japanese) 
 Consumer Product Safety Law 
http://law.e-gov.go.jp/htmldata/S49/S49F03801000018.html (in Japanese) 
 High Pressure Gas Safety Law 
http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go .jp/law/detail/?id =1974&vm=04&re=01 
 Safety Regulations for Road Vehicles 
http://www.mlit.go.jp/jidosha/jidosha_fr7_000007.html (in Japanese) 
 Law Concerning the Safety Assurance and Quality Improvement of Feed 
http://www.maff.go.jp/j/syouan/tikusui/siryo/index.html (in Japanese) 
 Law Concerning Examination and Regulation of  Chemical Substances and Regulation of 
Chemical Substances and Regul ation of Their Manufacture 
http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/chemic al_management/english/cscl.html  
 Industrial Safety and Health Law 
http://wwwhourei.mhlw.go.jp/cgi-bin/t _taikeisearch.cgi?KEYWORD=0502&MODE=h
ourei&DMODE=CONTENTS&SMODE=NORMAL&PAGE=1&FILE=FIRST&SORT=NONE  (in Japanese) 
 Telecommunications Business Law 
http://www.soumu.go.jp/joho_tsusin/eidsystem/index.html (in Japanese) 
 Radio Law 
http://www.tele.soumu.go.jp/e/index.htm 
 Fertilizer Control Law 
http://www.famic.go.jp/ffis/fert/sub1.html (in Japanese) 
 
 JIS 
http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/la w/detail/?printID=&ft=1&re=01&dn=1&co=
01&ky=%E5%B7%A5%E6%A5%AD%E6%A8%99%E6%BA%96&page=5&vm=02 
 JAS 
http://www.maff.go.jp/j/jas/jas_kikaku/kikaku_itiran.html (in Japanese) 
 N.B. The address is not listed for the Building Standard Law since its standard does not fall 
under either the technical regulation or the standard defined in Annex 1 of the TBT Agreement. 
 
Page 38, Para 47 and Table III.5 
The Report mentions in paragraph 47 that approximately 56% of JIS standards were 
"comparable" to international standards. Howe ver, Table III.5 seems to indicate a much lower 
percentage. 
 
Q30:  Could Japan clarify the reasons for this discrepancy? 
 
RESPONSE:  Paragraph 47 mentioned that approxi mately 56% of JIS standards were 
"comparable" to international standards. « Sec tion B. V oluntary standards, Japan Industrial 
Standards (JIS), corresponding to international standards in Table III.5 » also mentioned the 
same figures. Thus, there is no discrepancy. 
 
Q31:  Could Japan provide more detailed expl anations as to how JIS standards are 
developed? In particular, how is it ensured t hat foreign industry can participate in, or 
provide input into the standards developmen t process to the same extent as Japanese 
industry?  
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 173 
 
 
 RESPONSE: In case of Japanese Industrial Standards (J IS), Japan has been implementing the 
transparent process as follows in order to give opportunities for stakehol ders including foreign 
parties to participate in the development process. 
 
a) When drafting JIS standards for the estab lishment or revision of JIS standards, any 
stakeholder can make comments to JIS draf ting committees and necessary information is 
uploaded on the website.  b) When the draft JIS standards are subm itted to technical committees under the Japanese 
Industrial Standards Committee (JISC), any st akeholder can make comments to technical 
committees and necessary information is uploaded on the website. 
c) Based on the WTO/TBT Agreement, Japan  makes a public announcement to allow 
stakeholders to have a comment submission peri od (at least 60 days) before the establishment 
and revision of JIS standards.  
 
Q32:  Furthermore, could Japan provide further information as to how compliance with 
the Code of Good Practice in Annex 3 of the TBT is ensured, particularly with regard to 
points F (use of international standards), H (avoiding duplication with work of 
international standards bodies), I (specification of standards in terms of performance) 
and J (publication of work programme)?  
 
RESPONSE:  With regard to the JIS (Japanese I ndustrial Standards), Japan completely 
complies with the points of WTO/TBT Agreement Annex 3 Code of Good Practice. With regard 
to point F and point I, JIS Z 8301: 2011 which regulates rules for the layout and drafting of JIS, 
stipulates “to align with International Standard to the utmost extent possible if there is a 
correspondent International Standard” (4.1 f) an d the “specification of standards in terms of 
performance” (4.2), which are principles to estab lish JIS. In fact, 97% of JIS, which are 
comparable to international standards, are aligne d with international standards. Moreover, with 
regard to point H, the ISO/IEC standards mirro r committee is generally in accord with the JIS 
drafting committee, which makes it possible to avoid duplication with the work of the 
international standards body. Finally, In terms of point J, the work plan is  published every 
month on the JISC Homepage ( http://www.jisc.go.jp/app/pager ). 
 
Q33:  Finally, could Japan clarify how transparency obligations set out in point L of 
the Code of Good Practice are complied with?   
 
RESPONSE: In conformity with point L of ANNEX 3 of the TBT Agreement, before adopting 
standards, periods for the submission of comment s on the draft standards by interested parties 
are provided and notices announcing the periods for commenting are published. 
 
Q34: Regarding the JIS mark regime and the use of standards can the Japanese 
Government indicate, referring to the total number of standards supporting the JIS 
mark regime, in how many cases a JIS ma rk can be obtained on the basis of 
International standards without any deviation, and in how many cases national 
standards deviating from International standards have to be applied? 
 
RESPONSE: Regarding the JIS mark scheme, a JIS mark can be obtained based on the 
Japanese Industrial Standards (JIS), however the JIS standards supporting the JIS mark regime 
is not determined by the government but by requests from industry. Thus, the number of JIS 
standards supporting JIS mark regime changes frequently based on the needs of industry. 
Consequently, the government of Japan does not  have the number of cases when a JIS mark can 
be obtained on the basis of JIS standards identical to international standards.  
 
As reported in the para 47, in 2011, 56% of JI S were comparable to in ternational standards, 
97% of which were aligned w ith international standards. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 174 
 
 
 Q35: Could the Japanese Government explain the ro le of the JIS mark in the context of 
public procurement? In the cases wher e a JIS mark regime exists for public 
procurement, does the requirement of co mpliance with the JIS mark prevail over the 
possible compliance with international standards? 
 
RESPONSE: The JIS mark scheme is a voluntary scheme.  In some cases, the JIS mark is used 
as one of the requirements in the notice of proc urement. The procurement entities decide to use 
JIS mark in accordance with Article 6 (2) of the GPA.  
 
Q36: Are the Technical Regulations defining the scope and application of the JIS mark 
scheme and related standards subject of notifications in accordance with the TBT 
Agreement? 
 
RESPONSE: Since the JIS scheme is voluntary, the Government of Japan allows, in 
accordance with the Annex 3 of the WTO/TBT Agreement, a period for submission of 
comments before adopting JIS standards. The Government of Japan notifies the proposed 
Technical Regulations in accordance with the WTO/TBT Agreement.  
 
Mandatory technical regulations 
Page 40, Para. 53 
 
The report mentions that technical requirement s for the registration of pharmaceuticals were 
changed during the review period, including m odifications in the minimum requirements for 
biological products (MRBP). The Cabinet Decision of 10 July 2012 indicates that the MHLW 
shall conduct a revision of the MRBP to ensure consistency with international standards in 
terms of specifications and testing methods fo r vaccines. The Cabinet Decision also prescribed 
further actions to be undertaken by the MH LW to eliminate the so-called 'vaccine gap'. 
 
Q37:  Could Japan indicate what the state of pl ay of MHLW's work on this issue is, and 
provide further details in this regard?  
 
Q38:  Could Japan please indicate how these changes could reduce the delays in the 
homologation of new pharmaceutical produc ts and whether it intends to further 
promote the adoption of international standards and the recognition of foreign test data? 
 
RESPONSE: Consideration on the revision of the Minimum Requirements for Biological 
Products (MRBP) was undertaken by an expert gr oup together with experts from the industry 
including the European Federation of Pharma ceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA).  
Investigation on the revision of the MRBP is to  be continued taking into consideration the 
industry’s views (including those of EFPIA) as necessary.  
Japan is in the process of participating in PIC/S, which is a framework consisting of 
pharmaceutical inspection authorities including the EU so that Japan and the EU will further 
progress MRA through mutual understanding and communication of regulatory information 
between Japan and the EU. Japan’s accession assessment will be undertaken in 2013. 
 
Regarding the installment of new vaccines,  which the WHO recommends, to the National 
Immunization Program, the National Immuniza tion Committee made a statement on “the 
revision of immunization (2
nd proposal)” on May 23th, 2012. It stated that 7 vaccines (HPV, 
Hib, PCV, chicken pox, mumps, PPSV, hepatitis  B) should be implemented in the National 
Immunization Program. It is also stated that 3 vaccines in particular (HPV, Hib, PCV) should be 
guaranteed smooth implementation since they have been on the temporary immunization   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 175 
 
 
 program since 2010. In reaction to the statement, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare 
will submit a draft revision of the Immunization Law to this regular Diet session. 
 
Page 41, Para. 55  
The report indicates that Japan has amended its safety and environmental regulations for motor 
vehicles to align them with regulations under the 1958 UN Agreement.  
 
Q39:  Could Japan indicate how it plans to adopt more regulations under the 1958 
Agreement so as to base its domestic regulations on international standards whenever 
possible in accordance with Article 2.4 of the TBT Agreement? 
 
RESPONSE: Japan intends to apply UNECE regulations  in accordance with its priorities, 
taking into account elements such as domestic and international requests, the impact on safety 
and the environment, and the economic ramifica tions of harmonization, etc.  In order to 
achieve this, Japan will work actively to pr omote the application of UNECE regulations.  
 
The EU further notes that, according to the Cabine t Decision of 10 July 2012, the Ministry of 
Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (M LIT) shall draft and publish a roadmap toward 
the adoption of UN regulations 'of which th ere is a substantial need for adoption'. 
 
Q 40:  Could Japan indicate the state of play of this roadmap, and whether this 
roadmap will include only UN regulations relevant for the introduction of the 
International Whole Vehicle Type Approval (IWVTA), or also other UN regulations. 
More generally, could Japan indicate in what other areas of the car sector it intends to 
adopt international standards? 
 
RESPONSE: Japan is currently preparing the ro admap and will publish the roadmap in 
FY2012. Other areas of the car sector are not under consideration at this moment.  
 
(b) Sanitary and phytosanitary measures  
 
Page 42, Para 61  
As the report shows, Japan has established a very strict authorisation process of food additives. 
As a consequence, it appears that Japan bans the use of various add itives that are allowed 
worldwide.  
 
Q41: What is the state of play and prospects of the reform work regarding approval 
procedures for food additives (with special emphasis on the duration of the approval processes)? How is Japan going to accel erate the approval procedures for food 
additives in order to avoid undue delays fo r food additives which are widely used 
worldwide but are subject to lengthy an d cumbersome approval procedures in Japan?  
 
RESPONSE: In the designation (approval) of food additives, Japanese relevant laws require 
risk assessment by the Food Safety Commission of Japan (FSC) which is conducted based on 
request by the Ministry of Health, Labour a nd Welfare (MHLW) and subsequent procedures, 
including review by the MHLW in light of  the assessment results from the FSC. These 
procedures are steadily conducted, taking into co nsideration international standards and the 
latest information from in and outside Japan. 
 
In September 2012, based on the July 2012 Cabinet decision, Japan published a roadmap for the 
designation of food additives that are widely used  worldwide but are not yet approved in Japan, 
stating a standard time frame as about one year . The time frame does not include the period 
required to collect additional information. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 176 
 
 
 Since the publication of the roadmap, both th e MHLW and the FSC have enhanced necessary 
resources. Since October 2012, two su bstances have been designated. 
 For 3 of the remaining 13 substances, the FSC h as completed risk assessment and the MHLW is 
carrying out the remaining procedures toward designation. 10 substances are under assessment 
by the FSC.  
Page 42-43, Para 60-65 
 The report describes the SPS policy in Japan. Wi th regard to maximum residues levels, 
additives and microbiological norms,   
Q42:  Is Japan considering to recognize that the EU is free of classical swine fever as it 
has already been recognised by the World Organisation for animal health? 
 RESPONSE: Japan is recognizing the CSF-free status of the EU member states from which it 
receives requests after evaluating the r esults of individual risk assessments.  
 
Q43:  Is Japan considering adopting an alternati ve treatment to methyl bromide for the 
treatment of fruit flies?  
 RESPONSE: Japan has not adopted methyl bromide fo r the phytosanitary treatment of fruit 
flies. When a treatment (e.g . cold treatment) proposed by an exporting country has been 
evaluated as appropriate, Japan has adopted it as phytosanitary treatment.  
 
Page 43, Para 32 and 65  
The report informs on Japan’s imposition of import prohibitions on beef and poultry. 
 
Q44:  What is the possibility of extending th e new opening for European beef recently 
granted to France and the Netherlands to other EU Member States, who have applied 
for market access for beef, and who ha ve submitted the required application 
questionnaire, including the options for a fast track review of applications from 
countries with neglible BSE risk status? 
 
RESPONSE: Before lifting of a ban on beef import from BSE affected countries, the Ministry 
of Health Labour and Welfare (MHLW) requests the Food Safety Commission (FSC) that is the 
risk assessment body in Japan to conduct a risk assessment for each country.  
 The MHLW considers that EU member states requesting lifting of a beef import ban do not 
need to submit the EU Regulations hereafter. In principle, the FSC will conduct risk assessme nts in order of the requests from the MHLW. 
(c) Bilateral, regional, and multinati onal arrangements on TBT and SPS measures 
 
Page 44, Para. 69  
 
The Japanese Government states that it has ma de considerable efforts to line up the Japanese 
standards to international standards, in  particular the Codex Alimentarius.  
 
Q45:  With regard to maximum residues le vels, additives and microbiological norms, 
could Japan also indicate when it intends to align its norms to the international ones set 
by the Codex Alimentarius? 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 177 
 
 
 RESPONSE: For the establishment and amendment of food  specifications and standards, a risk 
assessment conducted by the Food Safety Commission (FSC) and deliberation by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) based on the FSC’s risk assessment are required. When the establishment or amendment of each specification or standard, such as maximum 
residue levels, food additives, and others, is considered by the MHLW, the MHLW harmonizes 
specifications and standards with the Codex standards whenever possible.  
 
Q46: Is the Japanese government going to a rrange the Sanitary and Phytosanitary 
Measures within the limits established by the Codex Alimentarius and, particularly 
concerning ready-to-eat foods where growth  of bacteria Listeria monocytogenes will 
not occur (vg, pork meat)?
8 
 
RESPONSE:  Currently, the Food Safety Commission is conducting risk assessment on Listeria 
monocytogenes  in response to a request from the Mini stry of Health, Labour and Welfare 
(MHLW).  After completion of the risk asse ssment, the MHLW will consider establishing 
standards based on the assessment, also ta king into account the Codex standards. 
 
(d) Labelling requirements and packaging requirements  
Page 44-45, Para 70-73 
 The report describes the changes to labelling o ccurred during the period under review. The EU 
understands that the Consumer Affairs Agency is  about to revise the labelling requirements for 
household products and is working on  a comprehensive labelling law.  
 
Q47: Could Japan inform on the status of the law above mentioned? And how will 
Japan take international standards into account in this revision?  
 
RESPONSE: The labelling requirements for household pr oducts are not being revised by the 
Consumer Affairs Agency at present. On the ot her hand, unifying several food labelling laws is 
under consideration to im prove the Food Labelling System in Japan. International standards 
have been taken into account irrespective of the unification.  
 
Q48:  Does Japan have any plans to enable that ”f ood contact” products  could be tested 
in any Government approved laboratory regardless of the country of export?  
 
RESPONSE: The test results of foreign laboratories that are approved by the exporting 
countries and are included in the “List of Fo reign Official Laboratories” are eligible as 
documentation to be submitted to the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) for the 
examination of import declaration b ased on the Food and Sanitation Law.  
 The test results of laboratories in a third country that is not an exporting, manufacturing or producing country and which can cooperate with the MHLW when inquiries about the data arise 
during the examination are also ready to be available documentation to be submitted to the 
MHLW for examination. 
 
                                                 
8 Codex Alimentarius Guidelines ( CAC/GL 61 –2007): 
 
Point of application  Microorganism  n  c  m  Class Plan  
Ready-to-eat foods from the 
end of manufacture or port of entry (for imported products), 
to the point of sale  Listeria 
monocytogenes  
5
 a  0  100 cfu/g  b  2 c  
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 178 
 
 
 (3) MEASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE 
(i) Taxation and tax-related assistance 
(b) Recent reforms 
Page 50, para 102:  
 
The report describes undertaken reforms in tax ar ea in the financial year 2012. One of the 
introduced tax measures is the extension of the "eco-car" tax cut for three years (until April 
2015).   
Q49:  Could Japan identify the mentioned ca rs on which is tax cut applied? What are 
the criteria for the category "eco-car"?  
 
RESPONSE: For example, electric vehicles and plug-in hybrid vehicles, fuel efficient cars, etc 
are included in the category "eco-car". With regard  to “eco-car tax cut” of the 2012 tax reforms, 
please refer to the following websites.  
http://www.mof.go.jp/english/tax_pol icy/tax_reform/fy2012/tax2012a.pdf  
(FY 2012 Tax Reform) 
 
(ii) Subsidies and other financial assistance Page 51, para 105: 
 
The report gives information on subsidies for pur chasing new environmentally friendly vehicles 
that have been re-introduced by th e Japanese government in December 2011. 
 
Q50: Could Japan indicate the criteria that the above-mentioned cars have to meet in 
order to be subject of the above described subsidies?   
 
RESPONSE: The scope of the subsidies is passenger cars, trucks, and buses. The criteria for 
the subsidies are to achieve the 2015 FY Japanes e fuel efficiency standard or the 2010 FY 
Japanese fuel efficiency standard +25%. Th e vehicles imported under the PHP system, a 
simplified vehicle certification procedure for ve hicles imported in small amounts (hereinafter 
“PHP vehicles”) must deliver official overseas fuel  efficiency (official fuel efficiency used 
under overseas fuel efficiency regulations*) that is compliant with the above criteria.  
*”Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE standards)” in the U.S. or EU regulation “CO2 emissions” in the EU.  
The EU notes that the report does not mention domestic wood subsidies. However the EU 
knows that domestic wood subsidies are proposed as part of next year’s budget. The EU is 
concerned about the potential impact of invest ment subsidies for sawmills as well as for  
building companies that is conditioned to the use of domestic wood. Information so far 
indicates that such scheme ould invol ve import substitution subsidies. 
 
Q51: Could Japan provide more information on this?  
 
RESPONSE: The Government of Japan will not introdu ce such subsidies as indicated in the 
EU’s question.  
 
 
    
 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 179 
 
 
 (iv) Intellectual property rights  
(e) enforcement 
Domestic effort to combat counterfeiting and piracy 
 
(e) Enforcement 
Page 64, para 158 
 
The Report mentions high level of IPR infringement on internet (53,6 %). The authorities in Japan indicate infringement of copyright by 15 %.  
 
Q52: What are the measures taken by Japanese authorities to protect copyright on the 
internet? How do Japanese authorities enforce the infringement of copyrights on the internet? Do internet providers in Japan ha ve some level of liability on the content 
infringing IPRs on the internet?  
 RESPONSE: Japan has actively engaged in activities ag ainst piracy on the Internet through 
developing relevant legal system s, promoting legal content dist ribution, cooperating with the 
related ministries and raising public awareness.  Recently, Japan amended the Copyright Act in 
2012, in which the provisions related to tec hnological protection meas ures were amended and 
those related to criminalization of  illegal downloading were added.  
 
In Japan, an Internet service provider does not assume a general legal obligation to observe 
content infringing IPRs and other illegal inform ation on the Internet. Whether the Internet 
service provider is responsible for distribution of such information or content is examined on a case-by-case basis, and ultimately judged in court.  
 
Border enforcement 
Page 66, para 165 
 
The Secretariat's report states that "the customs authorities made efforts to apply all the border 
measures required by the TRIPS Agreement to de  minimis imports; monitored the shipment of 
IPR-infringing products throug h international post; utilized a Customs Intelligent Database 
System, which enhances the efficiency of the Cust oms' work; and provided customs officials with 
professional training, including an IPR-related training programme". 
 
Q53:  Could Japan explain whether it intends to take further steps to counter the import of 
counterfeit goods for "personal use"? 
 
RESPONSE: Japan Customs initiates identification pr ocedures when the goods are suspected 
to be infringing Intellectua l Property Rights regardless of  the quantity of the goods.  
 
(2) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING EXPORTS 
(vi) Export promotion schemes   
Page 48, Para 95 
 
According to the report, the authorities indicat e that Japan has no subsidy or tax concession 
schemes to promote exports. 
 
According to press reports, the government-aff iliated Japan Bank for International Cooperation 
(JBIC) will set up a fund of up to 200 billion yen. The planned fund will provide financial 
support to domestic companies in the form of capita l injections/investment, rather than loans, to 
help them acquire foreign firms and make overseas investments. 
  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 180 
 
 
 Q54:   Could Japan please clarify if such a Fund is being considered and whether it 
will be export-oriented?  
 
RESPONSE: Japan’s latest “Emergency Economic M easures” (Cabinet Decision on 11 Jan, 
2013) focuses on the creation of wealth through gr owth by stimulating private investment. In 
this context, JBIC’s new facility for equity in vestment was introduced. It is intended not to 
establish a “fund” but to facilitate Japanese co mpanies’ overseas business for growth through 
equity investment. 
 
XVIII.  IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
XIX.  (1) AGRICULTURE 
(i) Structure Page 73, para 3 
 
According to the report, under the Agricultural Land Law, "general corporations" (including 
stock companies and other forms of corporations , profit or non-profit) are permitted to lease 
farmland. According to data provided by the au thorities, 838 general corporations were newly 
involved in agriculture between December 2009 a nd March 2012; the authorities state that there 
are no data detailing general corporati ons' share in agricultural production. 
 
Q55:  Could Japan indicate the main fields of activities of the newly created 838 general 
corporations?   
 
RESPONSE: Among the 838 general corporations that were newly involved in agriculture,  
－22 percent are corporations in food-related industries; 
－18 percent are corporations already involved in agriculture but not using farmland (e.g. 
Promoting seeds and/or some type of livestock);  
－14 percent are corporations in the construction industry. 
 
Q56:  Could Japan also indicate whether foreign investors own stakes in the newly 
created general corporations?  
 
RESPONSE: Japan has no regulations on the capital composition of general corporations 
taking lease on farmland, and does not have data  to indicate whether foreign investors own 
stakes in the corporations.  
 Page 74, para 7  
The report affirms that the Government conti nues to maintain the production adjustment 
programme. 
 
Q57:  Could Japan provide information on the result of the assessment of the 2010 pilot 
program on rice? What is the amount dedicated to it in FY 2012? Can the Japanese 
government confirm that the programme was extended to other crops? May Japan please 
make available the amount of funding per crop for FY2011? 
 
RESPONSE: According to a survey of farmers carried out in February 2011, 3 out of 4 
respondents wanted the program to be conti nued. The budget for rice in 2012 was 193 billion 
yen. 
 
Regarding extension, support for products other than rice had already existed since before the 
2010 introduction of payment for rice. In 2011,  those pre-existing payments were regrouped   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 181 
 
 
 with the newly introduced rice payment under a common umbrella program, thereby reducing 
the administrative burden incurred by farmers.   Unlike in the case of the stand-alone payment schem e for rice, payments for other products are 
supported by basket budgets and therefore th e amounts per product are not available. 
 
(ii) Border measures Page 78, Para 14 
 The report informs on the programmes to promote exports of food and agricultural, forestry, and 
fishery products, targeting these to reach ¥1 trillion by 2020. The authorities state that this is to 
be achieved among others by implementing st rategic marketing under the "Japan Brand 
 
Q58:  Could Japan clarify what  is meant by "Japan Brand"? 
 
RESPONSE: “Japan Brand” is the overall term used for the promotion of Japanese food and 
agricultural, forestry, and fishery products. In ot her words, a national brand as opposed to a 
prefectural brand only used in the domestic market.  
 (3) MANUFACTURING 
Page 85, Para 38 
 
According to the report, the Innovation Network Corporation of Japan (INCJ) provides 
financial, technological and management suppor t with a view to promoting the creation of 
"next-generation businesses". For example, INCJ has acquired the majority of shares of the 
Japanese chip company Renesas in December 2012.  
 
Q59: Could Japan explain the rescue plan for Re nesas? What is the impact of this 
acquisition from the point of view of Ja pan's industrial and co mpetition policy? How 
will the Government of Japan ensure a level-playing field for all electronic 
manufacturers on the Japanese market , including the European ones? 
 
RESPONSE: The Innovation Network Corporation of Japan (INCJ) determines its investment 
from their own business viewpoints independently from the government. Please refer to the website below for details.  
http://www.incj.co.jp/PDF/1357796859.en.pdf  
 
Renesas has supplied their products to a wide  range of industries, including domestic and 
international ones. Therefore, it is expected that its investment will lead to stabilization of the 
domestic and international supply chains. 
 
(4) ENERGY AND UTILITY 
Page 85, Para 42 
 
In the electricity market, the Government is c onsidering important regulatory reforms, such as 
the establishment of an independent national grid  company and further liberalization of retail 
sales.   
Q60:  Can Japan provide more details on the planned reforms? What is the timeframe 
for the reforms? 
 
RESPONSE: A rough guideline for electricity reform in Japan was suggested by a report 
compiled by the Advisory Committee under METI  this month. Based on the report, the 
Government of Japan will consider the future di rection of electric reform until the end of this 
March. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 182 
 
 
 The main reform issues in the report and the time it will take to make such reforms are as 
follows:       • Establishment of a new entity to secure  nation-wide transmission operations: target year 
2015 
     • Full retail competition (expansion of re tail competition in the residential sector): target 
year 2016 
     • 1) Legal unbundling to achieve furt her neutralization of power transmission and 
distribution sectors, 2) Removal of price regulations for electricity: target year 
2018-2020  
 
Q61:  The Minister of Finance and the Minist er in charge of Industry may order the 
suspension of a foreign investment in el ectric and gas utilities if they consider it may 
adversely and seriously affect the smooth m anagement of the Japanese economy. Could 
Japan please explain under which circumstances such a judgment could be made?  
What are the relevant criteria? 
 RESPONSE: 
The Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act, wh ich is fully compatible with OECD rules, 
stipulates that restrictions on inward foreign direct investment are limited to two areas: i) those 
pertaining to national security, public order and publ ic safety; and ii) those pertaining to sectors 
where there could be “significant adverse effect on the smooth management of the national economy.   In this context, we are screening whether or not  the foreign investment in the electric and gas 
utilities sector disturbs the maintenance of public order. 
 
(5) SERVICES (i) Financial services Page 87, Table IV.6 
 The table illustrates the Japan’s market a nd regulatory regime for financial services. 
 
Q62:  Could Japan please clarify how the ma rket shares in the banking sector were 
calculated. E.g. do they represent revenues from banking activities, deposits, etc.? Should Japan Post Bank be listed among top 5 largest banks? If yes, what would be its 
market share? Furthermore, Could Japan pl ease clarify how the market share in life 
insurance was calculated and why Japan Post Insurance is not listed among the state-owned insurance providers? Finally, c ould Japan confirm that there are no other 
state-owned insurance providers? 
 
RESPONSE: The market share in the banking sector is measured in terms of total assets. For 
statistical reasons, the Japan Post Bank is excluded from the rankings. The Japan Post Bank 
would be ranked 2nd with assets worth 195 trillion yen.  
 The market share in life insurance is measured  in terms of premiums and other income. The 
Japan Post Insurance and the Jap an Post Bank are wholly owned by the Japan Po st Holdings, 
which is wholly owned by the Minister of Finan ce. No other insurance company is state-owned. 
 
Page 87, para. 46 
 
The Secretariat's report states that " Cooperatives and mutual institutions (Kyosai) are significant 
players in particular for the small and me dium enterprises and regional markets segments ". 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 183 
 
 
 Q63:  Could Japan provide detaile d information on the market share of the kyosai in the 
various sectors and market segments?  
 
RESPONSE: In life insurance, as of end-2010, the total amount of premium and other income 
was 41.0 trillion yen, out of which the kyosai accounts for 5.9 trillion yen.  
In non-life insurance, as of end-2010, the total amount of premium and other income was 10.3 trillion yen, out of which the kyosai accounts for 2.3 trillion yen.  
Q64:  Could the Japanese authorities demonstrate the equivalence between the provisions 
applied to kyosai and those applied to privat e insurers, in particular as regards the 
soundness of the business and consumer protection, the methods for calculating the mutual aid premiums and the liability reserve?  
 
RESPONSE: Kyosai cooperative societies are mutual-a id organizations established by people 
in the same geographical area or field of work . The members invest their own capital and use 
the insurance services that the organization provid es. These services form part of a broad range 
of mutual-aid services available to the members (j oint ventures, loans, welfare services, etc.). 
Because of their unique nature they need to be  regulated separately, and each of them operates 
within the scope of the law and under the supe rvision of the relevant government authorities.  
 
In addition, mutual-aid activities being conducted by the agricultural cooperative society and the 
consumers' cooperative society, are regulated under the Agricultural Cooperatives Act and the 
Consumer Cooperatives Act which have provisions  equivalent to those applied to private 
insurers, so that soundness of the business and consumer protection are guaranteed by 
prudent  supervision such as careful review s on the method for calculating the mutual aid 
premiums and the liability reserve. 
 
Page 88, para. 51 
 
The Secretariat's report states that " foreign ownership remains marginal in banking services ".  
 Q65:  Could Japan state whether there are any pl ans to attract more inward FDI in this 
specific sector? 
 
RESPONSE: Regulations on investment in the banking sector aim to ensure the sound and 
appropriate operation of banking business. These regulations (ex. Article  52-2-11, 52-9 of the 
Banking Act) apply to both domestic and foreign investors alike in a non-discriminatory 
manner, and thus these are not meant to restrict foreign direct investment.  
 
Pages 87 – 88, para 46 – 51 
 
According to the report, the major regulatory cha nge regarding financial services since the last 
TPR of Japan in 2011 is the revised Postal Servi ce Privatization Act, passed by the Diet in April 
2012, which significantly changes the conditions of privatization of the Japan Post Group established by a 2005 law.  
Q66:   Can Japan clarify the role to be played by the various bodies (Ministry of 
Finance, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication, the Financial Service 
Agency, and the Postal Services Privatisation Commission) involved in the privatization 
process?  
 
RESPONSE: In the process of postal services privatization, the relevant bodies play their roles 
as follows:  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 184 
 
 
 (1) the Ministry of Finance has jurisdiction ov er affairs concerning disposing shares of the 
Japan Post Holdings, which are national properti es (i.e. they are possessed by the Government); 
(2) the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Comm unications has jurisdiction over Postal Services, 
supervises the Japan Post Hold ings and the Japan Post Serv ices Company, and carries on the 
affairs (“add-on regulations” which require equi valent conditions of competition with other 
financial institutions) provi ded in the Postal Services Privatization Act until the last day of the 
transitional period(*) (3) the Financial Services Agency supervises th e Japan Post Holdings, the Japan Post Bank and 
the Japan Post Insurance pursu ant to the Banking Act and the Insurance Business Act in the 
same manner as other financial institutions, and carries on the affairs provided in the Postal 
Services Privatization Act until the last day of the transitional period(*); (4) the Postal Services Privatization Committ ee, which is an independent organization 
consisting of experts, states its opinion to the relevant  ministers as they approve Japan Post 
Group’s new business etc., conducts a comprehe nsive review of the progress of the postal 
services privatization process triennially and states  its opinion to the director general of the 
Postal Services Privatization Headquarters (the Prime Minister) on the basis of its review, and 
studies and deliberates other affairs concerning postal services privatization.  (*)The period terminates when the JPH disposes of all the shares of each financial institution 
OR when half or more of the shares of the tw o financial subsidiaries have been disposed of by 
the JPH and the Commissioner of the FSA and the Minister of Internal Affairs and 
Communications judge that the equivalent cond itions of competition between the two financial 
subsidiaries and other financ ial institutions are secured. 
 
Q67:  What is the timeframe towards full priv atisation (including listing at the Tokyo 
Stock Exchange)?  
 
RESPONSE: On October 2012, the Japan Post Holdings Co., Ltd. (JPH), made an 
announcement of their stock sales plan to arrange a system for being listed within approximately three years.  
 
The Japanese government will decide  the specific timing of selling the stock in the JPH, taking 
into consideration the progress in the enhancem ent of the governance of the JPH, its financial 
results and stock market conditions.  Under the Postal Services Privatizations Act, the stock of the Japan Post Bank (JPB) and the 
Japan Post Insurance (JPI) will be disposed as soon as possible while taking into regard the 
business conditions of both companies and the im pact on the universal service obligation. 
 In October 2012, the JPH announced that it will clarify the policy of disposing the stock of the JPB and the JPI, until the completion of the disposal of 50 per cent stock of JPH.  
A concrete timeline of disposal is yet to be de termined. The JPH will judge the appropriate time 
to dispose the stock of the JPB and the JPI, cons idering various factors such as the proportion of 
disposed stock of the JPH and the stock market condition, in addition to the consideration items provided in the PSPA. 
 
Q68:  What are the steps to be taken for the authorisation of business expansion by 
Japan Post Group companies/subsidiaries? 
 
RESPONSE: When the Japan Post Bank or the Japan Po st Insurance (hereinafter referred to as 
“the financial subsidiaries”) applies for appr oval of the services which are regulated under 
business restrictions, the Prime Minister (or the Commissioner of the Financial Services 
Agency) and the Minister of the Internal A ffairs and Communications will decide on the   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 185 
 
 
 approval upon hearing an opinion from the Postal Services Privatization Committee, which is an 
independent organization consis ting of experts, and after considering whether there is 
possibility that the equivalent conditions of co mpetition between the financial subsidiaries and 
other financial institutions and the appropriate provision of the services to users are unlikely to 
be secured. 
 
Adding to this, pursuant to the Banking Act/the In surance Business Act, the Prime Minister (or 
the Commissioner of the Financial Services Ag ency) examines whether it is secured that the 
applying service will be provided in a sound and efficient manner.  Page 88, para. 48 - 50  
The report informs that Japan is currently carryi ng out a postal reform, which mainly is directed 
to privatisation and streamlining the operations  of Japan Post, and its financial services. "The 
Japanese authorities explained that the revised Post al Service Privatization Act had a provision 
to ensure equivalent conditions of compe tition between the Japan Post Group and operators 
offering similar services, and that the Government  of Japan intended to continuously ensure 
consistency with the WTO Agreements  and other international agreements ". 
 
Q69: Can Japan explain how it intends to ensure that no cross-subsidisation and 
spill-over of benefits takes place between  universal service of Japan Post and the 
express and courier services? Could the Japanese authorities confirm and explain the reason why the customs declaration value th reshold is higher for EMS packages of Japan 
Post than for packages of private sector operators. 
 
RESPONSE: If Q69 refers to “the express and courier services” as Express Mail Service 
(EMS) of international postal service, the answer is as follows:  
 - EMS is stipulated in the Universal Postal Convention as a part of the postal services, and 
Japan does not consider international courier services provided by the international express 
carriers to be a similar service.  
With regard to customs clearance for internati onal postal items including EMS, in principle, 
Japan applies procedures to these items different  from the ones applied to general cargos for 
commercial use, since the majority of the inte rnational postal items have such features as 
containing small-lot goods for personal u se unilaterally dispatched by senders. 
 
However, in line with the similar approach u sed in other countries, Japan Customs adopts the 
Declaration and Taxation Method un der which importers must make declarations by themselves 
if the goods declaration value threshold ex ceeds 200,000 JPY, in the same manner as the 
declaration for general cargos.  It is because such declaration is expected to be made adequately, as most of the goods are 
supposed to be for commercial use or mail-order u se and the receivers are considered to be well 
aware of the contents and prices of the items.  The report mentions that comments were submitted  by stakeholders on the  Postal Service 
Privatization Please Act. 
 
Q70: Could Japan explain the measures taken  by the authorities to address points 
raised by certain stakehol ders with respect to the revi sion of the Postal Service 
Privatization? In particular, could Japan indicate:  
(i) what measures were taken to prohibit cross-subsidiarization between the financial 
branches and the postal branch of Japan Post; WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 186 
 
 
 (ii) what measures are taken to en sure foreign financial service providers a 
non-discriminatory access to the post office network of Japan post;   (iii) why the new measures taken with respect  to Postal Service Privatization  exempt 
Japan Post financial entities from certain aspects of the Insurance Business and 
Banking Law, unlike other (forei gn) financial service suppliers.  
 
RESPONSE: 
(i) The financial branches and the postal branch of the Japan Post were divided into separate 
companies in 2007, in order to prevent cross- subsidization. The accounting systems of these 
companies are clearly separated. (ii) There has been no legal restriction on th e Japan Post Services Company (JPSC) to sell 
insurance products including those of foreign fina ncial institutions other than those of Japan 
Post Insurance (JPI) and Japan Post Bank (JPB). In fact, some insurance companies other than 
JPI have agency contracts with the JPSC to sell their insurance products through post offices. 
(iii) All the provisions of the Banking Act and the Insurance Business Ac t are fully applied for 
the JPB and the JPI respectively, as is the case with the other banks and insurance companies. 
Therefore, we can say that no exception is made  for the JPB and JPI in the Banking Act and the 
Insurance Business Act.   
Additionally, pursuant to Article 65 and 68 of the PSPA, Japan Post Holdings is currently 
exempt from the following regulations of the Banking Act and the Insurance Business Act: the 
Banking Act, in order to secure sound banki ng and insurance business, prohibits a banking 
holding company from holding subsidiaries other than certain types of banking related companies and the Insurance Busi ness Act, for the same purpo se, requests insurance holding 
companies to get the Authorities’ approval to hol d subsidiaries other than certain types of 
insurance related companies.   This exception was established in the PSPA becau se JPH, which has a subsidiary of post 
services, cannot sell JPB and JPI shares immediately, while the PSPA demanded of the Government additional supervision over the JPB an d the JPI besides that set by the Banking Act 
and the Insurance Business Act.   
 This exemption will end when JPH sells 50% of the shares of the JPB and JPI, as the JPH will 
then no longer be a holding company of the JPB and JPI. 
 
Note: In the Banking Act and the Insurance Busi ness Act, “holding” means to have more than 
50% of company share.  
 
Page 89, Table IV.7 
 
The table illustrates the Japan’s market  and regulatory regime for banking. 
 
Q71:  Could Japan please provide the details of the reciprocity test related to the 
licencing of banks. In particular, is granti ng of a licence to a foreign bank subject to the 
requirement that the home supervisor of th e foreign bank provides reciprocally licences 
to Japan banks?  
 RESPONSE: The Banking Act provides that the Prime Minister shall make an examination as 
to whether Japanese banks are given substantially similar treatment in a foreign country whose 
banks apply for a license in Japan. However,  this shall not apply to cases where such 
examination would prevent the faithful fulfillment of an international agreement. (Article 4-3)  
“Substantially similar treatment” does not necessarily require the home supervisor of the 
applicant foreign banks to recipro cally grant licenses to Japanese banks.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 187 
 
 
 Page 90, Table IV.7 
 
The table has a section dedicated to “Measure s to ensure compliance with the Basel 
Committee's Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision” affirming that the Financial 
Service Agency (FSA) states in supervisory guide lines: "the FSA tries to reflect principles and 
guidelines, with regard to bank su pervision, which the Basel Comm ittee, etc. develops on their 
supervision". The FSA has revised the Banking Act, supervisory guidelines, and inspection 
manuals, based on the Basel Committee's Core Principles (BCP). When the BCP itself is 
revised, the FSA will review the parts of the guide lines that relate to the revised parts of the 
BCP, as necessary. To ensure compliance with th e BCP, the FSA implements inspections and 
supervision while taking into c onsideration the scale and complex ity of financial institutions. 
There are overlapping inspections of Foreign Ba nks by the Financial Service Agency (FSA), 
Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commissi on, Tokyo Stock Exchange, Japan Securities 
Dealers Association; Ministry of Finance and Bank of Japan. Foreign Banks have to maintain 
special staff for coping with this task. 
 
Q72:  Do the Japanese Authorities estimate that these inspections create a risk of a 
breach of the principle on National Treatment?  
 
RESPONSE:  Inspections of financial institutions  (both foreign and Japanese financial 
institutions alike) are conducted by the following organizations:  
(a) the Japanese government as supervisory regula tors such as the Financial Services Agency 
and the Securities and Exchange Surveillance Commission; (b) the Bank of Japan based on the contracts with  financial institutions (those are referred to as 
“on-site examinations”); and 
(c) self-regulatory organizations (SROs) such as the Japan Securities Dealers Association, 
which are authorized under the Financ ial Instruments and Exchange Act. 
These organizations have been conducting insp ections effectively and efficiently through 
enhancing mutual coordination. In particular , in order to reduce the burden on financial 
institutions, coordination has been made not only among the regulators themselves, but also 
among the regulators, the Bank of Japan and the SR Os as to which financial institutions are to 
be inspected and the timing of the inspecti ons. These inspecting agencies are committed to 
improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the inspections. These inspections therefore do not constitute a breach of the National Treatment Principle. 
 
Page 90, Table IV.8 
 
The table details the main economic indicator s and the general regulatory framework for 
insurance services in Japan . For instance, for the “Licensing” section: 
“Criteria for assessing applications for insuran ce licence are listed: sufficient financial and 
organizational base to conduct insurance underwr iting; and whether the underwritten insurance 
products are appropriate. 
Incompatibility of life and/or non-life insura nce licences: insurance companies may conduct 
only one of these businesses. Differential treatment for foreigners in the licensing process: no distinction under the Act. 
Prior approval of home-country supervisor: compatible home-country  regulation and other 
criteria applied exclusively to foreigners: a foreign insurer requires a certificate from an 
organization whose jurisdiction includes the home c ountry, proving that the insurer is lawfully 
conducting insurance business in its home country th at is similar to the insurance business it 
intends to conduct in Japan.” Japanese authorities have decided to allow Fore ign Banks to assume insurance activities. But 
these companies have to submit applications for any new “product “they launch into the market.  
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 188 
 
 
 Q73: Does  the Japanese Government intend to simp lify the concerned legislation in 
order to facilitate FDI in this sector?  
 
RESPONSE: The purpose of the licensing system in the insurance sector is, in view of the 
public nature of the insurance business, to protect policyholders by ensuring sound and 
appropriate management of insurance compan ies. (Article 1, Insurance Business Act) 
 
This applies to both domestic and foreign insu rance companies alike in a non-discriminatory 
manner, and thus it is not meant to restrict  foreign direct investment in this sector. 
 Page 94, para 61 
The Report specifies that Mode 3 is devoid of restrictions under both the GATS and EPAs 
except for one limitation: insurance intermediati on may only be supplied for insurance contracts 
allowed in Japan. 
 
Q74:  Could Japan please clarify why certain types of corporate transactions like 
mergers (shinsetsu gappei), spin-offs (kais ha bunkatsu) are not available for foreign 
insurance companies? Please explain how this  different treatment can be explained in 
view of Japan's GATS commitments wh ere no corresponding limitations were listed. 
 
RESPONSE: Foreign insurance companies operating in Japan consist of (a ) subsidiaries and 
(b) branches. The Companies Act allows the me rger of subsidiaries and company splits. (e.g. 
Article 748, 757) On the other hand, the concept of mergers and company splits does not apply to branches by their nature, and accordingly, th e provisions for mergers and company splits are 
non-applicable for branches. As a matter of course, the Companies Act does not envisage 
Japanese insurance company branches merging or splitting, neither. 
 
Therefore, non-application of the provisions for mergers and company splits for foreign 
insurance company branches do not constitute a violation of Japan’s GATS commitments 
including national treatment.  
(ii) Telecommunications   
Page 95, para. 66 and Table IV.11 
 
The table illustrates the Japan’s market structure and regulatory framework for 
telecommunications sector. 
 
Q75:  Could Japan make clear weather it intends to set up a regulatory body 
independent from the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC)? 
 
RESPONSE: The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC) is legally and 
structurally independent and, as stipulated in  Article 5 of the Telecommunications Reference 
Paper of the Fourth Protocol to the GATS, it is ensured that MIC is separate from, and not 
accountable to, any telecommunications servi ces suppliers. Taking account of the current 
situation of the telecommunications sector in Japan, fair competition is properly ensured and 
significant progress has been made in the telecommunication market under the current 
administrative structure. Thus, Japan is not planning to review the current governmental 
structures related to telecommunications. 
 
Q76:  Following the introduction of the functional separation system for NTT East and 
NTT West, what is Japan's assessment of the impact of this reform? Does Japan 
consider this reform has led to a higher l evel of competition in the telecommunication 
market? What other steps does Japan intend to take in order to ensure fair competition? 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 189 
 
 
 RESPONSE: Japan conducted the functional separation in 2011 in order to promote fair 
competition among telecommunications carriers and now a study on the effectiveness and 
appropriateness of that separation is currently u nderway. A comprehensive study is going to be 
held in 2014 and Japan plans to discuss further st eps if an environment of fair competition has 
not been realized.  
 
Q77:  There seem to be indications that access  prices in Japan are higher than in other 
comparable jurisdictions. Would Japan cons ider undertaking a benchmarking study of 
access prices and use regulatory measures to drive the access prices down? 
 
RESPONSE: The unbundling price for optical fibe r cables is calculated based on a 
predicted-cost method while the unbundling pri ce for metallic lines is calculated based on a 
real-cost method. The price for optical fibers is decreasing as demand increases, while the price 
for metallic lines is on a rising trend on the back of flagging demand. 
 
The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communicat ions has convened a group to study the price 
for metallic lines and as well as the access charge for metallic lines in the migratory phase from 
metallic lines to optical fiber lines. 
 
(iii) Transport 
(b) Air transport  
Page 101, Para 82 
 
The report mentions that airports are all public ly owned and publicly managed, but a recently 
published document defining the medium-long te rm strategy for aviation mentions the 
possibility of establishing a concession regime and ev en privatization. A restructuration of the 
landing fees schedule is also envisaged, in order to give preference to small and medium-size 
aircraft, promote the development of low-cost  carriers, and advance the open sky policy. 
 
Q78:  Could Japan make clear what measures the Japanese Authorities intend to take to 
ensure non-discriminatory access to majo r Japanese airports (Narita and Haneda), 
align the airport fees to the level applied in other major airports in the world and avoid 
distortions of competition between airlines?  
 
RESPONSE: Slots at congested Japanese airports in cluding Narita and Haneda airport are 
allocated according to the IATA guidelines without discrimination.  
 
Page 102, Para 85  
The report affirms that from a technical point of view, the liberalization has taken the form of 
the relaxation of pricing clauses (evolving towards free pricing), and capacity clauses (evolving towards free determination), and the addition of  modern cooperation/code share clauses. The 
lack of available slots at Haneda and Narita h as hampered these efforts but there are plans to 
increase available slots following the completion of a new runway in 2010 at Haneda and 
substantial investments in airport facilities at Narita. 
 
Q79: Although Japan has relaxed control o ver air fares recently, the fare approval 
system, which covers also surcharges (such as fuel charges) and other charges (such as 
check-in-charge for upgrades) still remains valid. Japan is one of the few countries in the 
world which requires fare approval – a clear limitation on airlines' flexibility on the 
market. Also some pricing restrictions in th e guidelines further limit flexibility (such as 
the highest-priced economy fare cannot be hi gher than the lowest-priced business fare). 
At the same time, travel agencies are not bo und by the system and can publish any fare WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 190 
 
 
 any time. What is the rationale for keepi ng this approval system?  Does Japan have 
plans to abolish the approval system? 
 
RESPONSE: In Japan, the maximum fare approval system  is applied to the international air 
transport fare. Thus, airlines can decide optio nal fares under the approved standard and the 
JCAB (Japan Civil Aviation Bureau) doesn ’t examine the compatibility among fares. 
Accordingly, the approval system doesn’t especi ally limit the flexibility of airlines. Also, we 
need to retain the rule in orde r to prevent the probable case that some air routes enter a state of 
oligopoly and passengers are forced to choose unfairly high fares.  
Since other charges including fuel surcharges are set in a different scheme from fares, regarding 
special situations such as an in crease in fuel charges, the JCAB  needs to examine whether the 
price corresponds to the cost.  In addition, the same rule is applied to ai r transport fares that travel agencies sell. 
 
Q80:  30,000 additional slots are foreseen to become available by March 2014 at 
Haneda airport; since demand by far outweighs supply, how will slots be allocated to 
airlines so as to ensure fairness? Moreov er, international flights to Europe are 
currently restricted only to night time slots; when will day slots be available to 
European airlines?  
 
RESPONSE: Slots at Haneda airport are allocated according to the IATA guidelines without 
discrimination. Long-haul routes will be serve d in daytime at Haneda airport from the 2014 
Summer Schedule at the earliest.  
 
Q81:  Ground transportation at Haneda Air port: public trains and busses do not 
currently run early enough to meet the early- hour departures (flights to Europe are only 
allowed during night-time) while travel agencies are discouraged from operating bus 
services due to the high insurance costs. This further reduces the valu e of night slots (in 
comparison to day slots). Are there plans  to improve the airport's connectivity? 
 
RESPONSE: Regarding the ground transportation at Haneda Airport, public transportation 
operators are trying to enhance bus and railway  services in order to accommodate passengers for 
night time flights. Japan plans to discuss and coordinate measures with relevant parties as 
necessary.  
 (v) Distribution Page 107, para. 99 
 
According to the report there are no ENTs in place on large-scale distribution outlets, however 
zoning regulation is applied at local level. 
 
Q82:  Is Japan taking any steps at central le vel to ensure that locally applied zoning 
regulation does not amount to ENTs and is  not implemented in a discriminatory 
manner? 
 
RESPONSE:  Zoning regulation is determined by local governments for the purpose of city 
planning according to the actual situation of each region. No discriminatory regulations are 
being taken against foreign companies.  A person establishing a new large-scale retail store shall make a notification to the prefecture in 
which said large-scale retail store is located. We  do not have an ENT system. Concerning the 
notification, there is no discrimination between domestic and foreign enterprises.    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 191 
 
 
 Page 108, para. 100 
 
According to the report, Japan' s regulatory system for alcoholic beverages is based on licences 
and quotas. 
 
Q83:  Can Japan explain how it intends to improve the transparency of the licensing 
procedures? 
 
RESPONSE: In Japan, producers and sellers of alcoholic  beverages are required to be licensed. 
The licensing procedures and the review standa rds relating to liquor licenses, as well as the 
handbook for license application, are made public  on the National Tax Agency’s website, for 
instance, so as to improve transparency and en sure the uniformity of procedures for application 
review.  
OTHER QUESTIONS 
 
ENVIRONMENT  Joint Crediting Mechanism (JCM)  
 Q84:  Could Japan provide information on the criteria for the selection of technology 
 providers under Japan's new po licy action on climate change?  
 
RESPONSE: Details of the JCM are under consultation with countries concerned and have yet 
to be determined.  
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 192 
 
 
 20.ASEAN 
 
Questions from ASEAN for the Eleven th Trade Policy Review of Japan 
Report by Japan 
1) Pg. 19, Paragraph(s) 66 - 78 
ASEAN notes Japan’s economic recovery from the financial crisis, par ticularly with the 
measures and reforms that the Government  enacted such as the “Comprehensive 
Reform of Social Security and Tax” bill to  ensure fiscal stability and the “Strategy for 
Rebirth of Japan”.    
 
 
Can Japan provide additional or supplementary information on the latter strategy 
and what benefit(s) it provides?   
RESPONSE: Please see the following link. This in itiative was adopted under the past 
administration.  
http://www.npu.go.jp/policy/ pdf/20120731/20 120731_en.pdf    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 193 
 
 
 21. THAILAND 
 
WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM Thailand 
 
PART I:  QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SECRETARIAT REPORT 
 III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
 
Page 22 (paragraph 6) 
Question 1: Thailand notes that importers and other concerned parties could request advance 
rulings. We, therefore, would like to explore th e scope of such rulings whether they cover 
valuations, tariff classifications, and origins. In addition, we would like to seek a clarification 
on non-binding rulings, that is, whether such rulings apply to importers and/or concerned 
parties who request them 
 RESPONSE: Japan Customs provides advance rulings on Tariff classification, Customs 
valuation and the Rules of origin.  Japan Customs does issue binding rulings at the request of the importers or other interested 
persons, fully complying with Standard 9. 9 and guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto 
Convention and such rulings are honored by Japan Customs.  Even though importers have a 
choice of whether to use that advance ruling in th e import declaration procedure, if they use it, 
Customs officials have to follow it and cannot ignore it.  
【Standards9.9 of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
The customs shall issue binding rulings at the reque st of the interested person, provided that the 
Customs have all the information they deem necessary. 
【Guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
In some administrations, they may be legally bi nding and provided for in national legislation, 
whereas in other there may simply be a co mmitment by the Customs to honor the ruling. 
 
※Japan would like to correct the last sentence in Paragraph 6 as follows. 
 
At the request of importers and other concerne d parties, Japan issues written advance rulings. 
Such rulings are honored by Customs at the time of import declarations, and published on the Customs website for the reference of the public. 
 
Pages 31-32 (paragraph 24) 
Question 2:  Since the method for allocating quot as of Japan tends to be complex, could Japan 
provide more details of the quota-allocati on process and also where our exporters/importers 
can find the information regarding the process in order to understand it better?  
RESPONSE:  The quota announcements, which explai n the standards and procedures to 
retrieve the import quotas are published in METI Website. http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/external_economy /trade_control/boekikanri/import/wariate/index.
htm#suisanbutsu (Japanese only) 
 
Page 39 (paragraph 50) 
Question 3:  The provisions of the Japan Ag ricultural Standards Law (JAS Law) and the 
labeling of JAS marks on the products seem quite complicated, comprising mandatory technical 
standards and voluntary standards.  What are the differences between these two and how does 
Japan implement them under the law?  Could Japan give details of which 44 and 19 products 
were revised their standards?  Were those revi sed standards more trade restrictive or less WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 194 
 
 
 trade restrictive? We would appreciate it if Japa n could provide the list of the products along 
with their revised standards or where we can fi nd such information in the public domain. 
 
RESPONSE:  
1) Mandatory technical standards under the JAS Law 
JAS Law stipulates mandatory labelling including the proper labelling of quality information, 
such as ingredients and product origin, and its main purpose is to contribute to providing 
choices to general consumers. The latest amen dment of 44 provisions related to mandatory 
labelling based on the JAS Law is not trade- r estrictive in nature; the amendment was made 
mainly for the sake of update after revision of the relevant laws.  
The list of 44 provisions is as below: 1. Quality Labeling Standard for Processed Foods 2. Quality Labeling Standard for Genetically Modified Foods 3. Quality Labeling Standard for Miso 4. Quality Labeling Standard for Stock Soup for Noodles 
5. Quality Labeling Standard for Brown Rice and Polished Rice. 
6. Quality Labeling Standard for Ca nned and Bottled Agricultural Products 
7. Quality Labeling Standard for Ca nned and Bottled Livestock Products 
8. Quality Labeling Standard for Canned and Bottled Cooked Products 9. Quality Labeling Standard for Fruit Juice 
10. Quality Labeling Standard for Carbonated Beverages 
11. Quality Labeling Standard for Soy Milk 12. Quality Labeling Standard for Carrot Juice and Carrot-Mixed Juice 13. Quality Labeling Standard for Bacon 14. Quality Labeling Standard for Ham 
15. Quality Labeling Standard for Pressed Ham 
16. Quality Labeling Standard for Mixed Pressed Hams 17. Quality Labeling Standard for Sausages 18. Quality Labeling Standard for Mixed Sausages 19. Quality Labeling Standard for Chilled Hamburger Patties 20. Quality Labeling Standard for Chilled Meatballs 
21. Quality Labeling Standard for Fish-Meat Hams and Fish Sausages 
22. Quality Labeling Standard for Dried Noodles 23. Quality Labeling Standard for Instant Noodles 24. Quality Labeling Standard for Macaroni 25. Quality Labeling Standard for Ko ri Dofu (dried frozen soy curd) 
26. Quality Labeling Standard for Breads 
27. Quality Labeling Standard for Pickled Agricultural Products 28. Quality Labeling Standard for Processed Tomatoes 29. Quality Labeling Standard for Jams 30. Quality Labeling Standard for Processed Sea Urchin 31. Quality Labeling Standard for Uni-Aemono (marinated sea urchin) 
32. Quality Labeling Standard for Salted Wakame 
33. Quality Labeling Standard for Boiled and Dried Fish 34. Quality Labeling Standard for Processed Eel 35. Quality Labeling Standard for Dressings and Dressing-Type Seasonings 
36. Quality Labeling Standard for Edible Vinegar 
37. Quality Labeling Standard for Flavored Seasoning 
38. Quality Labeling Standard for Dehydrated Soups 39. Quality Labeling Standard for Worcester Sauces 40. Quality Labeling Standard for Edible Fats and Oils 41. Quality Labeling Standard for Margarines 
42. Quality Labeling Standard for Retort Pouched Food   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 195 
 
 
 43. Quality Labeling Standard for Chilled Pot Stickers (gyoza) 
44. Quality Labeling Standard for Prepared Frozen Foods  2) Voluntary standards under the JAS Law 
Under the JAS standard system, manufacturers, processors, importers or distributers of 
agricultural forestry products may, having obtained certification from Registered Certifying Bodies, evaluate whether or not their products  comply with the relevant JAS standards and 
attach JAS logos to relevant products for distribution. It is up to manufacturers, processors, importers or distributers to attach JAS logos to their 
products. Those without JAS logos do not ha ve restrictions on their distribution*. 
The details of the 19 revised standards ar e available on the following MAFF website: 
http://www.maff.go.jp/j/jas/jas_kikaku/kikaku_itiran.html  (*) For organic plants and organic processed foods of plant origins, the Organic JAS standard is 
mandatory to be able to indicate that they are organic. 
 
Page 43 (paragraph 65) 
Question 4: The paragraph explained very well the s ituation with regard to the spread of BSE.  
However, Thailand is interested in lear ning about the progress on lifting the ban on poultry 
products.  Has Japan reviewed the situation regar ding the import prohibition due to avian flu? 
Thailand has been recognized as free from av ian flu since the end of 2008, and many WTO 
members lifted the import prohibitions on poult ry from Thailand.  Accordingly, Thailand 
wishes to request Japan to accelerate the pro cess of validating the risk-free situation of 
Thailand in order to remove the import prohibiti on of fresh, chilled and frozen poultry products 
from Thailand, particularly chicken, as soon as possible. 
 
RESPONSE: Regarding the approval of the import of  poultry products from Thailand, Japan 
has been conducting risk assessme nt according to the “Standard  Procedure for Approval for 
Import of Designated Items into Japan to be Quar antined”. Japan will conduct an on-site visit as 
the next step when it is confirmed that  the provided information is sufficient. 
 
Page 44 (paragraphs 70-72) 
Question 5: Under the JAS Law, there are 52 mandatory labeling standards for food currently 
in force, and food containing additives, all organi c plants and organic processed foods, as well 
as genetically modified foods, are also required to be labeled.  Could Japan explain how this 
complex system of SPS measures is consistent with the international standards under the WTO? 
 RESPONSE: The JAS Law aims to assist consumer decision-making through the appropriate 
labelling of product quality information, such as th e ingredients and product origin. To ensure 
transparency in food labelling, Japan ta kes necessary measures including TBT and SPS 
notification and does not treat domestic products and foreign products differently, in accordance 
with the WTO rules. Moreover, Japan’s labelling system takes account of international standard 
such as CODEX.  
 
Pages 50-51 (paragraphs 103-106) 
Question 6: We note that the Japanese govern ment emphasizes an importance on the New 
Growth Strategy and Rebirth Policy, which led Ja pan to provide special supports to encourage 
strategic industries, including fruits, soybean, wood  industry, and biofuel. We are interested in 
how these subsidies are implemented and, if possi ble, moderated so as to facilitate fair 
competition in global trade.  
RESPONSE: “The New Growth Strategy and Rebirth Policy”, revised as “the Comprehensive 
Strategy for the Rebirth of Japan” in July 2012,  specified the areas which the Government was 
going to focus on in the allocation of the FY2013 budget. However, as a result of the general WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 196 
 
 
 election in December 2012, “the Comprehensive St rategy for the Rebirth of Japan” will not be 
reflected in the budget.  Page 63 (paragraph 152) 
Question 7: Since currently Japan has no geogr aphical indication (GI) registration system, 
does Japan have a plan to develop GI registr ation and related measures to combat 
counterfeiting?  
 
RESPONSE: Japan established the Geographical Indication Study Group in March 2012, and 
has been exchanging opinions with representativ es of both domestic and foreign industries.  
The plans of future discussions by the study group and the method of GI protection in Japan are yet to be determined. Japan will continue to  consider the matter, taking into account the 
opinions of WTO Members.  
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
 
Page 73 (paragraph 2) 
Question 8: Would Japan kindly provide further details regarding the Basic Policy and Action 
Plan to Revitalize Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries?   
 RESPONSE: In the Basic Policy and Action Plan to Revitalize Food, Agriculture, Forestry and 
Fisheries, it is stated that the Government of Jap an will work intensively over the next five years 
for the enhancement of the competitiveness and s oundness of Japan’s food, agriculture, forestry, 
and fisheries through various strategies, including:  -enhancing competitiveness and sustainability of ag riculture through promoting consolidation of 
farmland and increasing the number of newcomers to agriculture 
-promoting cooperation among agricultural producers, food manufacturers and distributers -promoting the utilization of renewable resour ces in rural areas for energy production 
Please refer to the following website for more detail. http://www.npu.go.jp/policy/polic y05/pdf/20120815/2 0120815_en.pdf 
 
Page 73 (paragraph 3) 
Question 9: Since 838 general corporations w ere newly involved in agriculture between 
December 2009 and March 2012, does Japan have a plan to collect relevant data on them?  
 
RESPONSE: Japan has been collecting data on the number, the kinds of industries, and the 
main product of the newly involved corporations , and publishing them on the web site of the 
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (Japanese only).  (http://www.maff.go.jp/j/keiei/koukai/sannyu/pdf/sannyu.pdf)  e.g. Among the 838 general corporations (as of March 2012) that were newly involved in 
agriculture, 
－22 percent are corporations in food-related industries; 
－18 percent are corporations already involved in agriculture but not using farmland (e.g. 
Promoting seeds and/or some type of livestock);  
－14 percent are corporations in the construction industry. 
 
Page 74 (paragraph 6) 
Question 10: Since the direct-payment programme was extended to other crops, such as wheat, 
barley, potatoes, buckwheat, rapeseed, sugar beet , and soybeans, could Japan elaborate on how 
the direct-payment programme for these crops is implemented?   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 197 
 
 
 RESPONSE: Support for products other than rice had already existed since before the 2010 
introduction of payment for rice (for details, please refer to J apan's notifications up to 2009). 
In 2011, those pre-existing payments were regr ouped under a common umbrella program with 
the rice payments introduced in 2010, thereby re ducing the administrative burden incurred by 
farmers. At that time, the eligibility criteria of those pre-existing payments were relaxed to 
include all farmers who produce for the purpose of selling their products (farmers who produce 
only for self-consumption are not eligible). The rea son for including all farmers was so as not to 
suppress the potential of the small-scale but mo tivated farmers who intend to increase their 
farm size in the future. 
 Page 87 (paragraph 47) 
Question 11: We recognize that Japan’s Postal Servi ce Privatization Act was passed by the Diet 
in April 2012 and has significantly  changed the conditions of priv atization of the Japan Post 
Group.  We are interested in learning more about the current share-holding pattern of the 
Postal Service and whether foreign investors can hold shares of the Post.  If so, how? 
 RESPONSE: There is no restriction for foreign investors on the shareholding of the Japan Post 
Group.  The Government of Japan has the responsibility  of  constantly holding over 1/3 of the shares of 
the Japan Post Holdings. At the same time, it w ill dispose its shares in th e Japan Post Holdings, 
other than the ones to be held by the Government, at the earliest possible time. 
cf. Article 7 of the Postal Services Privatization Act (Act No.97 of 2005), Article 2 of the Act on Japan Post Holdings Co. Ltd.,(Act No.98 of  2005) and Article 3 of the Supplementary 
Provisions of the Act. 
 
The Japan Post Holdings has the responsibility of always holding all the shares of the Japan 
Post Services Company. cf. Article 6 of the Act on Japan Post Holdings Co. Ltd., (Act No.98 of 
2005)  The Japan Post Holdings will aim to dispose of all the shares of the Japan Post Bank and the 
Japan Post Insurance as soon as possible, wh ile taking into consideration the business 
conditions of both companies and the influence on the implementation of the responsibility for 
ensuring basic postal services (the Postal Services Privatization Act stipulates that postal services, simple savings, money transfers, debts and credit settlements, and insurance services 
should be made available in post offices integr ally, equally and universally throughout the 
country in a simple and user-friendly manner). 
 cf. Article 7 and 62 of Postal Service Privatization Act (Act No.97 of 2005). 
 
PART II:  QUESTION REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT REPORT  
Page 22 (paragraph 86) 
Question 12:  According to the new Food, Agri culture and Rural Areas Basic Plan in which 
Japan aims to raise the food self-sufficiency ratio  to 50% by FY2020, will this affect the GSP 
scheme that Japan grants to developing countri es especially for agricultural and fishery 
products? 
 
RESPONSE:   In order to enhance the food self-suffi ciency ratio, it is necessary that farmers 
produce agricultural products that are attractive to consumers. The government is promoting agricultural structural reforms in order to facilitate  farmers’ efforts in this regard, and does is not 
considering any change in GSP in this regard. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 198 
 
 
 22. PHILIPPINES 
Questions from the Philippines 
 
Report by Japan 
 
1. Page 24, Paragraph 98 (WT/TPR/G/276) 
 The report mentioned that a new policy measure on preferential treatment in the immigration procedure for foreign professi onals was introduced in May 2012 for the 
purpose of promoting the acceptance more highly skilled foreign nationals.  
 
How does the measure compare with the Mode 4 provisions, if any, in FTAs that 
Japan has forged with partners?  
 
RESPONSE: Entry and temporary stay of those who are recognized as “highly skilled foreign 
professionals” are not covered in the Commitm ents of Mode 4 prov isions in FTA/EPA. 
 Report by the Secretariat 
 
2. Page 61, Paragraph(s) 139-142 (WT/TPR/S/276) 
The report mentioned that the JPO made e fforts to meet long-standing backlogs of 
patent applications, including increasing the number of patent examiners and expanding 
the outsourcing of prior art searches.   
Could Japan provide additional or supplementary information on how the 
outsourcing to non-governmental agenci es was carried out? Was the outsourcing 
done domestically or elsewhere?  
 
RESPONSE: The non-governmental agencies need to be registered based on requirements 
stipulated by the law. At present, there are te n registered domestic agencies. Prior art searches 
are outsourced to the agencies that are selected from these previously registered domestic 
agencies. 
 
Report by Japan 
 
3. Page 22, Paragraph 86 (WT/TPR/G/276) 
 
Maintaining food self-sufficiency through de velopment of the domestic agricultural 
sector is one of the top priorities of Japan. Statistics show however that the rural population of Japan continues to decline from 35.4% of the total population in 1996 to 32.9% in 2011 and there are only about 2.6 million farmers out of a population of more 
than 125 million and their average age is 65.  
 
Anent to the Food, Agriculture and Rura l Areas Basic Plan (March 2010), could 
Japan provide additional or supplementary  information on the medium to long 
term strategy of Japan? 
 
RESPONSE: The Basic Plan tries to achieve the goal of 50% food self-sufficiency through 
steady implementation of a wide range of policy measures including - introducing Incomes Support Direct Payment Program for Farmers, - promoting production more responsive to consum er’s demand for higher quality,  safety and 
reliance, and 
- revitalizing rural areas by promoting collabor ation among producers, food manufacturers, and 
retailers.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 199 
 
 
 23. TURKEY 
QUESTIONS FROM TURKEY 
 REPORT BY JAPAN 
 II. TRADE AND INVESTMENT POLICY  (3) FTA/EPAS, pg. 10, Table: Ec onomic Partnership Agreements 
In the Government Report, for the EPA negotiati ons with Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), it is 
indicated that “Two rounds of negotiations and four rounds of informal intermediate meetings 
were held. The latest meeti ng was held in March 2009”. 
 
Could the Delegation kindly inform us about  recent developments regarding the EPA 
negotiations with GCC? 
 RESPONSE: 
There have been no updates on the Japan -GCC FTA negotiations since March 2009. 
 
(4) Other Regional/Bilateral Arrangements, pp. 12-13, para. 32 
In the Government Report, it is indicated that “the Council approved a mandate for the 
Commission to negotiate a comprehensive free trade agreement between  Japan and EU and 
authorised the opening of negotiations with Japan”.  
 
Could the Japanese Delegation provide further information about the recent developments regarding the possible Japan-EU Free Trade Agreement? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Since the approval of the negotiating mandate for the European Commission by the Council of 
the EU, the Japanese government and the Co mmission have been preparing for future 
negotiations. 
 
(4) Other Regional/Bilateral Arrangements, pg. 14, para. 44  
According to the Government Report, Japan set  up the JBIC (Japan Bank for International 
Cooperation) Facility for African Investment in  April 2009 for financial assistance to Japanese 
private companies.  
 Could Japan please indicate whether the JBIC Facility in question is still being 
implemented and whether the foreign companies investing in Africa through joint investment programmes with Japanese companie s are eligible for financial assistance? 
 
RESPONSE: 
The JBIC Facility for African Investment (FA I) is still active in fostering Japanese private 
business operations in Africa, and consists of various financial products. Companies partnered 
with Japanese companies can also benefit from FAI through the application by the Japanese 
companies to the scheme. 
 
REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT 
 I. ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT  (1) Main Economic Developments, pg. 2, para. 3 
The Secretariat report states that Japan will n eed to undergo structural reforms to overcome 
challenges to longer term growth that include very high public debt, the rapidly aging 
population, and deflation. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 200 
 
 
 Could Japan provide information what measures – if any – it takes to ensure that it 
embarks on such structural reform process to overcome these challenges? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Japan makes economic revival a top priority  among the numerous issues it faces. The 
Government is working through this challenge by undertaking an aggressive monetary policy, 
flexible fiscal policy, and a growth strategy th at encourages private sector investment in an 
integrated manner.  
Thus, the Government is implementing an unpr ecedented and bold policy package.  As an 
example, the Government and the Bank of Japan  released a joint statement (22 Jan. 2013), 
which stated that the Bank of Japan decided to introduce a “price stability target” at 2 percent in 
terms of the year-on-year rate of change in th e consumer price index and aims to achieve this 
target at the earliest possible time, and th e Government mapped out Emergency Economic 
Measures for the Revitalization of the Japanese Economy (Cabinet decision, 11 Jan. 2013) as 
the first step of the growth strategy to stim ulate private investment and achieve sustainable 
economic growth. Furthermore, the Government  will formulate measures for strengthening 
competitiveness and growth potential of Japan’s economy, and promote them strongly under the 
leadership of the Headquarters for Japan’s Econ omic Revitalization. Those measures include all 
possible decisive policy actions for reforming the economic structure such as concentrating 
resources on innovative R&D, strengthening the foundation for innovation, carrying out bold 
regulatory and institutional reforms and bette r utilizing the tax system. The Council on 
Economic and Fiscal Policy (CEFP) will discuss policy issues including the structural reforms concerned with economic revival to develop a basic reform program of economic and fiscal 
management in the middle of this year. 
 
As far as fiscal consolidation is concerned, th e Government of Japan will accord with the goal 
on primary balance to limit the issuance of govern ment bonds to the greatest extent possible in 
coming fiscal year's budget, and continue the Co mprehensive Social Security and Tax Reform. 
Also, CEFP will examine the road toward simulta neous realization of Japan's economic revival 
and mid-to-long-term sustainability of the fiscal structure. 
 
(2) Macroeconomic Policies, pg.2, para. 4 
The Secretariat's report describes Japan's macroeconomic policies and rising fiscal deficit in 
2011, with gross government debt reaching nearly 230% of GDP in the same year.  
 Could Japan please provide information on the level of its fiscal deficit and gross 
government debt as a share of GDP in 2012 an d its targets for the same variables for 
2013? 
 
RESPONSE: 
The actual level of the general government gross de bt of Japan as a share of GDP in 2012 is not 
available yet. It is necessary to achieve the fiscal  consolidation goal that the deficit ratio to GDP 
shall be halved from the ratio in FY 2010 by FY  2015 and the surplus shall be achieved by FY 
2020 for the primary balance of national and local governments. The Council on Economic and 
Fiscal Policy will examine the road toward si multaneous achievement of Japan's economic 
regeneration and mid-to-long-term sustainability of the fiscal structure.  
 (2) Macroeconomic Policies, pg.2, para. 4 
The Secretariat report states that over the long te rm, expenditures related to pension and health 
care are expected to rise.  
 Could Japan elaborate on the possible impacts of the expected rise in these expenditures 
on the debt level and the overall economy a nd provide information on what short and   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 201 
 
 
 long term measures –if any- are taken to prevent the above mentioned rise in 
expenditures or counter their adverse impacts on the fiscal account? 
 
RESPONSE: 
The Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare publishes the “Future Estimation of Expenses 
Relating to Social Security” which shows the estim ation of the social security benefits by 2025. 
In “the Comprehensive Reform of Social Secu rity and Tax”, which includes gradually raising 
the consumption tax rate, Japan will consider  not only improving social security but also 
prioritization and improved efficiency of benefits so that sustainable social security system can 
be realized by controlling the increase in the burden. 
 Japan expects extensive discussions to take pl ace in the National Council for the Reform of 
Social Security System, which consists of experts assembled in order to discuss the matters required for social security reform, and will promote the  reform.   (2) Macroeconomic Policies, pg.3, para. 5 
The Secretariat report notes that realization of a society not dependent on nuclear power is one 
of three underlying principles governing Japan’s energy strategy.  
 It seems that Japan is planning to alter its  energy mix for domestic use. How will this 
affect the technical and financial capabilities of  the Japanese compani es that in the past 
specialized in building nuclear power  plants both in Japan and abroad? 
 
RESPONSE: 
The former administration’s energy strategy is being reviewed from zero-base from perspectives 
such as the stable supply of energy and the reduc tion of energy costs. On the other hand, with 
regard to nuclear power plant exports, the form er administration made a clear statement that 
Japan offers nuclear technology of the highest standard in safety in the world to foreign 
countries which wish to utilize the nuclear technology of our country. Japan will continue this policy.  
 
(2) Macroeconomic Policies, pg.3, para. 7 The Secretariat report describes appreciation of ye n against the U.S. dollar during the review 
period (2011-2012) and states that the appreciation in the exchange rate has eroded the international competitiveness of Jap anese exports to some extent. 
 
 Could Japan please elaborate on how the introd uction of the "Price Stability Target" and 
the "Open-Ended Asset Purchasing Method" by the Bank of Japan in January played a role in the recent depreciation of yen agains t the U.S. dollar and whether Japan expects 
to gain competitiveness in its exports th rough pursuing further powerful monetary 
easing?  
 
RESPONSE: The aim of the monetary policy conducted by the Bank of Japan is to overcome deflation as 
early as possible and achieve sustainable ec onomic growth with price stability.  In 
implementing its monetary policy objective, the Bank of Japan does not and will not aim to weaken the yen.  (2) Structural Policies, pg.4, para. 10 
The Secretariat report describes structural polic ies implemented by Japan in order to increase 
the labour force.  
 Could Japan please explain how will the recently introduced “points-based preferential 
treatment for highly skilled foreign professiona ls in immigration procedure” affect the WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 202 
 
 
 foreign workers’ participation in the work  force and their employment conditions in 
Japan? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Under the points-based system, the activities of  highly skilled foreign professionals will be 
classified into 3 categories: Advanced academic research activities, Advanced 
specialized/technical activities, and Advanced bus iness management activities. According to the 
characteristic features of each activity category, points will be set to items such as “academic 
background”, “work experience”, “annual salar y” and “research performance”. If the total 
points reach a certain number, preferential immigration treatment will be granted to the 
applicable person. The purpose of this points- based system is to promote the acceptance of 
highly skilled personnel in Japan. Please see the website below regarding the details of the system.  http://www.immi-moj.go.jp/newimmiact_3/en/index.html  II. TRADE POLICY REGIME: FRAMEWORK AND OBJECTIVES  (1) Trade Policy Objectives, pg. 10, para. 2 
The Secretariat describes Japan’s approach fo llowed in economic partnership agreements and 
free trade agreements. The report notes that acco rding to the Basic Policy on Comprehensive 
Economic Partnerships, all goods , including certain sensitive products, would be subject to 
negotiations; however, the sensitivity of trade in certain products w ould be taken into 
considerations.  
 
A. C
OULD JAPAN PLEASE GIVE INFORMATION ON WHICH PRODUCTS ARE MOSTLY 
CONSIDERED BY THE JAPANESE AUTHORITIES AS “SENSITIVE PRODUCTS ” IN THE 
CONTEXT OF ECONOMIC PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS ? 
 
RESPONSE: 
As a result of negotiations, while taking into co nsideration the sensitivity of trade in certain 
products, products such as those listed below ar e exempt from tariff elimination in the Japanese 
EPAs: (for details, please refer to the products in th e category of “X” in the schedule of tariff 
concessions of Japan under the respective EPA) (1) some agriculture, forestry and fisheries pr oducts, such as milk and dairy products, rice and 
rice products, wheat and barley and their products; and   
(2) some industrial products, such as leather and footwear products.  B. (3)
 FOREIGN INVESTMENT REGIME , PP. 19, PARA .32 
 
It is stated in the Secretariat Report that “Inward FDI in Japan continues to be much lower than 
outward FDI, and is also relatively low compa red with that in other large OECD economies”. 
We understand that the continued low level of FD I may be attributed to factors such as the 
appreciating exchange rate and high costs of doing business in Japan.  
 
Could the Japanese Delegation reflect on reasons  why inward FDI has remained low in 
recent years?  What are the plans of Japanese Government to address relatively low level 
of inward FDI into Japan?  
 
RESPONSE: It is difficult to specify such reaso n as Turkey mentions. In any case, the 
Government of Japan has implemented a variety of policies to give incentives to inward FDI. 
Those policies are summarized as the "Program  for Promoting Japan as an Asian Business   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 203 
 
 
 Center and Direct Invest into Japan".  Please refe r to the website below for the contents of the 
Program:  
http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program.pdf 
The follow-up of the Program was conducted in June 2012. 
http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program-followup.pdf  
In addition, in order to show Japan’s willingness to welcome FDI into Japan, the Government of 
Japan is working on proactive public relations  through its diplomatic missions overseas and 
Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO)’s overseas offices.  
(3)
 FOREIGN INVESTMENT REGIME , PP. 19-21,  PARA .33 AND 39 
In the Secretariat Report it is indicated that “In December 2011, the Government approved the 
"Program for Promoting Japan as an Asian Busi ness Center and Direct Investment into Japan". 
Location subsidies, tax incentives, and reduced patent fees for R&D sites would be offered 
under the programme”.  
Could the Japanese Delegation elaborate more on the Program and exemplify 
improvements so far achieved in the invest ment environment of Japan for foreign 
investors? 
 
RESPONSE: 
The Government of Japan has implemented a vari ety of policies to give incentives to inward 
FDI. Those policies are summarized as the "Progr am for Promoting Japan as an Asian Business 
Center and Direct Invest into Japan": http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program.pdf 
The follow-up of the Program was conducted in June 2012: 
http://www.invest-japan.go.jp/pdf/en/program/program-followup.pdf  
The progress will be managed through PDCA (plan-do-check-act) cycle. 
 (3)
 FOREIGN INVESTMENT REGIME , PG. 20, PARA . 39 
It is our understanding that Japan provides fi scal and financial incentives to firms operating 
within the Comprehensive Special Zone System. 
 
 Could Japan detail the fiscal and financial incentives provided to these firms and give information on whether Japanese and foreig n companies are eligible for the same 
incentives within this system? 
 
RESPONSE:  Under the Comprehensive Special Zone (CSZ) system, the Government of Japan 
allows regulatory exceptions as well as tax, fiscal  and financial supports to pioneering efforts 
that deal with local issues and lead to econom ic revitalization. Please refer to the attached 
material for the contents of special measures provided under CSZ system.  All firms that conduct relevant projects in the CSZ are eligible for the special measures under 
the CSZ system under designated c onditions, regardless of the nationality of the firm owner or 
organization type.  (4)
 TRADE AGREEMENTS AND ARRANGEMENTS , PG. 17, PARA . 22  
The Secretariat Report cites that “During the period under review , annual Japan-EU Summits 
took place in April 2010 and May 2011. At  the 2010 summit, the leaders reviewed and 
welcomed the progress made regarding "a few sp ecific non-tariff issues" under paragraph 34 of 
the Joint Press Statement of the EU-Japan Summit of 2009. At the summit held in May 2011, the leaders agreed to start the negotiating pro cess for a comprehensive Economic Partnership 
Agreement (EPA)/Free Trade Agreement (FTA), and started a "scoping exercise", which would 
define the scope and level of the EPA. The scoping exercise was completed in July 2012”. 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 204 
 
 
 Could the Japanese Delegation provide more information regarding the outcomes of 
“scoping exercise”? 
 
RESPONSE: 
The scoping exercise was conducted between the Japanese Government and the European 
Commission from 2011 to 2012. Based on the successful  conclusion of the exercise, the Council 
of the European Union approved a mandate fo r the Commission to negotiate a Japan-EU 
EPA/FTA.   
(4)
 TRADE AGREEMENTS AND ARRANGEMENTS , PG.18, PARA .28 
It is stated in the Secretariat Report that “…at the 5th Trilateral Summit Meeting between 
Japan, South Korea and China in May 2012,  a consensus was reached to launch FTA 
negotiations within the year”.  
 
Could the delegation kindly inform us about  the coverage of these negotiations? Which 
chapters does the Government of Japan expect to be covered in this FTA? 
 
RESPONSE: 
The scope and coverage of the FTA among China, Japan and ROK is yet to be finalized. Japan 
is aiming for a comprehensive and high-level FTA. 
 
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
 (1) Measures Directly Affecting Imports, pg.32, para. 26 
The Secretariat Report cites that “Japan has in place a system of prior confirmation to collect 
data on certain imports. The system is intended to  ensure that these impor ts are for specific 
uses, and to verify documentation and origin re quirements. Prior confirmation is required from 
the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry, or other relevant minister; some items require 
confirmation from Customs”.  
Could the Japanese Delegation provide informa tion in detail regarding the context of 
prior confirmation? Could this implemen tation be accepted as an automatic licencing 
procedure? What is the average time to obtain prior confirmation? Is there any 
possibility of this implementation to place extra strains to the importer? 
 RESPONSE: On the prior confirmation system, any pr oducts are allowed to be imported if 
documents requested by laws are submitted. The in formation of the procedures of this system is 
published on METI Website.  
The time required for prior confirmation depe nds on case, and Japan a ttempts to reduce the 
burden on importers. For instance, it takes about  three days in case of tuna. In the case 
confirmation based on CITES (the Convention on In ternational Trade in Endangered Species of 
Wild Fauna and Flora), it takes about one week. 
The prior confirmation system is necessary as it plays important roles in complying with 
international agreements.  http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/external_economy /trade_control/boekikanri/import/jizen/index.ht
m 
(Japanese only) 
 
(1) Measures Directly Affecting Imports,  pg.33 para. 32-34 and pg. 35, para. 42 
The Secretariat Report notes that “…it would appear that government procurement is also used 
as an instrument of industrial policy for some sectors and to support SMEs” and that  “…local 
government procurement procedures are basically the same as those of the central government, 
except for Japan's voluntary measures”.    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 205 
 
 
 Further, it is underlined in the Report that  “Open tendering is the nor m in Japan's government 
procurement. However, for procurement contra cts between the Government and a Cooperative 
Association or Federation of Cooperative Asso ciations of small and medium enterprises 
(SMEs), 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). Procurem ent from SMEs is "encouraged" under the 
Law on Ensuring the Receipt of Orders from  the Government and Other Public Agencies by 
Small and Medium Enterprises (enacted in 1966)…”.   
Against this background, how does the Governme nt of Japan justify that its government 
procurement procedures are in full co mpliance with its GPA commitments? 
 RESPONSE: The objective of the Note for SMEs of Japan  in the GPA is to foster SMEs which 
hold an important position in the Japanese economy. Note does not intend to set an exclusive 
quota of contracts for SMEs.  
There is no nationality requirement for becoming a member of co-operatives or associations or 
no description of nationality in the definition of  the SMEs in  relevant laws. Therefore, no 
provision would prevent foreign SMEs from affiliating to cooperatives or associations. 
 
Concerning the government procurement from SM Es, “the Law on Ensuring the Receipt of 
Orders from the Government and Other Public Agencies by Small and Medium Enterprises” 
sets an annual target value of the procuremen ts from all SMEs. However, this target is 
non-binding.  The Law intends to give opportuni ties for SMEs to receive information on 
procurement schedule but does not assure them to be awarded with any actual contracts. 
 
(1) Measures Directly Affecting Imports, pg.43, para. 67 
The Secretariat notes that “Japan has Mutual Recognition Agreements (MRAs) on conformity 
assessment procedures with the EU for electrical products, telecommunications terminal equipment, and radio equipment; good laboratory practice for chemicals, and good manufacturing practice for medicinal products.” 
 
Also, on page 44, para. 68, it is stated that  “Japan will negotiate MRAs 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.” 
 
Turkey would appreciate if Japan could provi de further information on its cooperative 
approach in MRA negotiations including the in formation, if possible, on negotiations to 
start and those in progress. 
 
RESPONSE: Japan will generally consider MRA negotia tions, upon request by the industries, 
when it will be possible to reduce mutual costs,  will lead to improvement of market access and 
trade promotion, and where the level of regulation or accreditation in certain categories are almost the same. Japan has currently no bilateral MRA negotiations in progress.  
 
(1) Measures Directly Affecting Imports, pg.43, para. 67 
In the Secretariat Report page 43, it is indicated that “During the period under review, Japan 
concluded two FTAs/EPAs that include SPS and TBT chapters”.   
 
According to Japan’s FTA policy, which criterion does the Japanese Government have to include TBT and SPS chapters in an FTA? 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 206 
 
 
 RESPONSE: Whether to include Including TBT and SPS chapters in its FTA/EPA or not is 
decided on a case by case basis, taking into account the provisions of WTO TBT/SPS Agreements. Consideration will be given to respective situations regarding, for example, 
existing bilateral and other framewo rks and contents of negotiations.  
 (3) Measures Affecting Production and Trade, pg.51, para. 105 
The Secretariat Report states that “With a view to stimulating the domestic economy, the 
Japanese government re-introduced subsidies for purchasing new environmentally friendly 
vehicles in December 2011; subsidies are provided  for individuals that purchase any vehicle, 
domestically produced or imported,  that meets certain criteria”. 
 
Could the Delegation give more details about subsidies for new environmentally 
friendly vehicles along with the criterion to be  met to be eligible for these subsidies? 
 
RESPONSE: The scope of the subsidies is passenger car s, trucks, and buses. The criteria for the 
subsidies are to achieve the 2015FY Japanese fuel  efficiency standard or the 2010FY Japanese 
fuel efficiency standard +25%. The vehicl es imported under the PHP system, a simplified 
vehicle certification procedure for vehicles imported in small amounts (hereinafter “PHP vehicles”) must deliver official overseas fuel e fficiency (official fuel efficiency used under 
overseas fuel efficiency regulations*) that is compliant with the above criteria.  
*”Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE standards)” in the U.S. or EU regulation “CO2 
emissions” in the EU 
 
(3) Measures Affecting Production and Trade, pg.51, para. 106 
It is stated in the Secretariat Report that “Based on the New Growth Strategy, which indicates 
that potential demand is largest in seven strate gic areas, the Government has concentrated its 
resources into the development of these areas. In July 2012, the Rebirth of Japan: A 
Comprehensive Strategy was adopted as a c abinet decision to succeed the New Growth 
Strategy. Four key policy areas (energy and en vironment; health; agriculture, forestry and 
fisheries; and SMEs) are to be prioritized over three years”. 
 Could the Government of Japan elaborate on its plans under the framework of New 
Growth Strategy  in the area of “agriculture, forestry  and fisheries”, focusing on those 
that may bring about some repercussions for trade? 
 RESPONSE: “The New Growth Strategy and Rebirth Policy”, revised as “the Comprehensive 
Strategy for the Rebirth of Japan” in July 20 12, specified the areas which the Government was 
going to focus on in the allocation of the FY 2013 budget. However, as a result of the general 
election in December 2012, “the Comprehensive St rategy for the Rebirth of Japan” will not be 
reflected in the budget.  
 
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
 
(5) Services, pg. 104, para. 88 
The Secretariat Report states that  “Whereas most railway companies in Japan are private or 
privatized and operate urban, suburban, an d inter-urban routes, some urban transport and 
networks are publicly owned and managed.” 
 
Could the Government of Japan explain the share of state – owned railway network? 
 
RESPONSE: It is difficult to explain the share of state-owned railway networks, considering 
the characteristics of each railway company.  
    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 207 
 
 
 (5) Services, pg. 108, Table IV.19 
The Secretariat notes that ““The Wholesale Market Law in troduces a licence system wholesale 
trade service suppliers; there are some conditions  for the application of licences (Articles 15, 
17 and 33). The number of licences for suppliers at  Central Wholesale Markets may be limited 
(Article 17).”  
6. Could the Government of Japan provi de more details about the articles 
mentioned above?  
 
RESPONSE:  1 Wholesalers  
Any person who intends to wholesale in a central wholesale market shall obtain the permission (license) of the Minister of Agri culture, Forestry and Fisheries. 
The following cases, the permission shall not be granted. h. Applicant is not a juridical person. 
i. Applicant has been sentenced to punishment by fine pursuant to the provision of the 
Wholesale Markets Law, and three years have not elapsed from the date that the execution 
of the sentence finished or the date he/she b ecame no longer subject to the execution of the 
sentence. 
j. Applicant whose permission has been rescinded under the oversight provision of the 
Wholesale Markets Law and three years have not  elapsed from the date of the rescission. 
k. If the applicant includes an executive who fa lls under any of the following categories. 
v. A bankrupt person who had not restored his/her rights. 
vi. A person who has been sentenced to impris onment or to a fine pursuant to the 
Wholesale Markets Law and three years have not elapsed from the date on which 
execution of the sentence ended or th e sentence ceased to be executed. 
vii. A person who was an executive of a rescinde d juridical person when the matter that 
caused the rescission occurred and three years have not elapsed from the date of the 
rescission. 
viii. A person who was ordered to be discharged from a juridical person under the oversight 
provision of the Wholesale Markets Law and three years have not elapsed from the date 
of the discharge. 
 
l. Applicant who does not have the necessary know ledge and experience to ensure adequate 
execution of wholesaling activities in the central wholesale markets. 
m. Applicant whose net assets are less than th e Base Net Assets (1 million yen to 1.2 billion 
yen) set forth for each the item and handling procedure when specified by the Wholesale 
Markets Law. 
n. Where the maximum number of the wholesalers h as been specified by the operational rule 
of the central wholesale market prescribed by the establishment authority and the number of 
wholesalers would exceed the maximum limit if the application were granted.  
2 Intermediate Wholesalers 
a. Any person who intends to conduct intermed iate wholesale activity in the central wholesale 
markets shall obtain the permission of the establishment authority (local governments). 
b. The establishment authority shall prescribe standards for persons who intend to conduct 
intermediate wholesale activity. 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 208 
 
 
 24. TRINIDAD AND TOBACO 
 
WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM Trinidad and Tobago 
 
PART I: QUESTIONS REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT REPORT (WT/TPR/G/276) 
 III. TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT (1)  
AID FOR TRADE  
 Page 16, paragraph 53 
According to the Government Report, Japan in dicates its promotion of the “One Village, One 
Product” movement.   
1. How successful has this approach been in  the promotion of exports of developing 
countries, and how can a developing country have its product promoted under this 
programme? 
 
RESPONSE: 
The One Village One Product (OVOP) is a typical  approach under the Initiative. The OVOP is a 
movement which intends to promote local ec onomies through the development, improvement 
and promotion of local produc ts (foods, beverages, textiles & garments, etc.) with the 
participation of local people. This movement was first initiated in a southern prefecture in Japan 
in the late ‘70s and spread to the other prefect ures later on. It has been introduced to and has 
contributed to the development of local economies in other Asian countries.  Now the government of Japan is supporting th ese movements, especially the exports of 
developing countries and least developed count ries through technical cooperation such as the 
dispatch of experts and educational and traini ng programs to create competitive products. In 
addition, the government of Japan has held exhib itions and trade fairs inviting buyers and also is 
now opening shops (OVOP markets) in the in ternational airports in Japan to introduce 
developing countries’ products and encourage sales. Since establishment of the airport stores over one million people have visited the shops. 
 
PART II: QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SECRETARIAT REPORT (WT/TPR/S/276) 
 III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE (1) 
MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS  
(i) Customs clearance procedures and valuation  
Page 22, paragraph 5 
According to the Secretariat Report, all importers  must file a declaration with Customs before 
goods are brought into a hozei  (bonded) area. 
 
2. Can Japan kindly explain the features of a hozei  area? 
 
RESPONSE: 
The hozei (bonded) area refers to the area under th e supervision of the Customs. In a hozei area, 
importers can load and unload, transport, stor e, process, manufacture and exhibit foreign goods 
reserving the collection of customs duty or other taxes. 
 For the sake of ensuring proper enforcement and co llection of customs duties, foreign goods in 
the hozei area are placed under the supervision of the Customs.  
 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 209 
 
 
 (2) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING EXPORTS  
(vi) Export promotion schemes 
(b) Other export promotion schemes 
 
Page 48, paragraph 97 
According to the Secretariat Report, Japan pr ovides support to agricultural exporters through 
“…carrying out market research in foreign countries.”   
3. Can Japan describe the procedure for th is market research and the eligibility 
requirements? 
 The MAFF carries out market research on the main markets including growing markets through the interview of exporters, wholesalers and relevant  bodies, customer surveys and so forth. This 
research is carried out by professional research companies selected by the MAFF, and research results are widely available to the public. Comp anies which apply for the conducting of research 
shall be examined by the MAFF to determine whether they have sufficient eligibility for 
conducting research.  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 210 
 
 
 25. CHINESE TAIPEI-2 
 
WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF 
TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU 
 PART I: ON REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT (WT/TPR/S/276) 
 
XX.  
XXI.  IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
XXII.  (4) ENERGY AND UTILITIES 
Page 85 (Para 43) 
Under the provisions of the Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Law, foreign entities wishing 
to invest in electric and gas utilities must notify their intention to the competent authorities, 
including the METI.  The authorities state that permission is denied only on grounds of national security. It would appear that there has been little investment in energy and utilities.  
 
Question(s): 
20. According to the Electricity Business Act, it is required to obtain a license to conduct 
electric business in Japan. There are seven c onditions to licensing, including meeting the 
demands of the market, sufficient technical and financial capacity, a reliable plan, etc. These 
conditions are quite abstract, and the gove rnment has considerable discretion.  
Will foreign investors also be required to meet  these conditions, or just the national security 
requirement as stated?  Additionally, what are the main reasons for so little foreign 
investment in energy and public utilities in Japan? 
 
RESPONSE: According to the Electricity Business Ac t, aA foreign entity person that who 
intends to conduct General Electricity Business,  Wholesale Electricity Business and Specified 
Electricity Business shall obtain a license from the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry, 
and they shall satisfy the requirements of the Article 5 (i) ～ (vii). HoweverBut, the act has no 
requirements concerning the nationality of the entity is not required by the Act. 
 
On the other hand, under the provisions of the Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade Act*, a 
foreign entityies wishing to invest in electric a nd gas utilities shall notify its their intention to 
the Minister of Finance and the minister having jurisdiction. The ministersMinister of Finance 
and the minister having jurisdiction shall ex amine the notification from the viewpoint of 
whether the maintenance of public order, etc., will be isn't disturbed with the notification. 
 PART II: QUESTIONS REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT REPORT 
(WT/TPR/G/276) 
 XXIII.  IV. JAPAN'S DOMESTIC POLICIES 
A. (2)
 GROWTH  AND  FISCAL  CONSOLIDATION   
Page 20 (Para 76) 
The Government will work to draw up "Green  Policy Outline” by the end of 2012 as a more 
concrete package of regulatory and systemic refo rm, and budgetary reform in order to establish 
world-leading technology innovation in the energy field and to create new industries and jobs.  
 
Question(s): 
21. According to our understanding, the “Green Po licy Outline” involves solar panel subsidies.  
Could Japan please elaborate further on the subs idy content, the possible beneficiaries from 
the subsidies, the detailed rules and the current  implementation status of the “Green Policy 
Outline”, as well as the next st eps that it plans to take? 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 211 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  The 'Green Policy Outline' does not introduce a new solar panel subsidy. The 
new administration is currently conducting a zer o-based review of the energy and environment 
strategy of the former administration, includi ng the “Green Policy Outline”, and is forging a 
responsible energy policy while taking into acc ount the needs for stable energy supplies and 
reduction of energy costs.  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 212 
 
 
 26. COLOMBIA 
 
 
QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF COLOMBIA 
TO THE GOVERNMENT OF JAPAN 
 
Report by Japan (WT/TPR/G/276) 
 
(5) I NVESTMENT POLICY  
(i) Programme for promot ing Japan as an Asian Business Centre and Direct 
Investment into Japan 
 
 Paragraph 48 of the report by Japan states that:  "[o]n 16 December 2011, the Japanese Government formulated a Program for Pr omoting Japan as an Asian Business Centre 
and Direct Investment into Japan, which su mmarized the policy measures concerning the 
creation of an attractive, world-class business and living environment to boost the 
competitiveness of Japan as a business location by leveraging its business location environment 
and to promote direct investment into Japan, foremost by building Japan into a business centre 
in Asia."  
 Paragraph 49 further states that "[on] 22 June 2012, the Japanese Government 
performed follow-up on the program, and the Gove rnment decided to undertake the following 
initiatives, among others:  (1) 'Double Direct Invest ment into Japan' which refers to expanding 
the FDI inward stock to ¥35 trillion by the end of 2020;  and (2) 'Open Reconstruction' by 
promoting FDI in Japan." 
 
 These paragraphs mention a policy and programme in Japan to attract FDI:  
1. Is there any policy or draft policy to promote Japanese investment abroad? 
 
RESPONSE:  Japanese Government has promoted ove rseas presence of Japanese enterprises 
through such measures as;  
1) Holding bilateral economic dialogues  2) Improving investment environment through ODA 3) Concluding economic treaties including Bilatera l Investment Treaties, Economic Partnership 
Agreements, Tax Treaties, Social Security Agreements etc. 
4) Utilizing domestic agencies such as NEXI, JBIC, JETRO, JICA 
5) Participating in discussions at interna tional organizations such as WTO and OECD 
 
 
2. Is there a need to establish one? 
 RESPONSE:  As Japan answered to Colombia’s fi rst question 1, Japan has implemented 
policies to promote Japa nese investment abroad.  
 
3. Does Japan's policy to attract investment prioritize certain countries or 
investment in certain sectors?  If so, what  criteria is this prioritization based 
on? 
 
RESPONSE:  Currently there are no specific prioritized countries or sectors in Japan’s program 
to attract inward FDI.  
 
 According to paragraph 50 of the Govern ment report, "[t]he Asian Business Location 
Bill (Bill on Special Measures for the Promoti on of Research and Development by Certified   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 213 
 
 
 Multinational Enterprises) was approved by the Diet in July 2012.  The Act is to attract global 
companies establishing new R&D facilities and Asian regional headquarters in Japan;  and 
global companies certified by the competent Mini ster will be granted corporate tax breaks, 
reduced patent fees and other incentives." 
 
4. What are the requirements in the context of this paragraph for a multinational 
enterprise to be certified? 
 
RESPONSE:  In order to be certified under the Asian Business Location Law, a multinational 
enterprise must meet the requirements specified in  the Order Concerning the Certification, etc. 
of Research and development Business plans, th e Order Concerning the Certification, etc. of 
Supervisory Business Plans, and the Basic Po licy Concerning the Promotion of Research and 
Development Business and Supervisory Business by Specified Multinati onal Enterprises. In 
addition, when a multinational enterprise seeks co rporate tax breaks and/or income tax breaks, 
its domestic affiliated company must be engage d mainly in the Research and Development 
Business or Supervisory Business. 
The requirements also include the amount of  expenses for the experiment, research and 
development, number of employees, the amount of  paid-in-capital, and the total amount of the 
employees' salary.  
 III. TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT (1) A
ID FOR TRADE  
(2) G ENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES  (GSP) 
 
 Paragraph 61 of the report by the Government of Japan states that "[i]n order to 
improve market access for developing countries, Jap an introduced a preferential tariff treatment 
under the GSP scheme on 1 August 1971, and has re-examined it several times since then.  
Furthermore, under the scheme, Japan has granted special preferential treatment to LDCs since 
1980, including additional products for which preferences are granted only to LDCs.  Currently, 138 developing countries and 7 territori es, including all LDCs, enjoy the benefits of 
the GSP scheme.  This scheme has been vastly improved over the last several years, especially 
in 2007 and 2011.  In the comprehensive 'D evelopment Initiative for Trade' launched on 
9 December 2005, Japan announced its commitment to providing duty-free and quota-free (DFQF) market access for essentially all products  originating from LDCs.  Japan is fully 
committed to implementing the above initiative thus  complying with the decision adopted in the 
Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration.  In rea lization of the above-mentioned commitment, on 
1 April 2007 Japan started improved DFQF treatment for LDCs by adding a variety of items to 
the treatment.  As a result, the number of ag ricultural and fishery products originating 
from LDCs which receive DFQF preferential trea tment increased from 497 to 1,523 and that of 
industrial products increased from 4,185 to 4,2 44 .  Consequently, treat ment coverage which 
was previously approximately 86% has risen to approximately 98% as defined at the tariff line 
level.  On 1 April 2011, Japan extended the effective period of the GSP scheme to 
31 March 2021.  Japan abolished all ceiling-b ased schemes for certain industrial products and 
revised the criteria for application of compe titiveness-focused, product-by -exclusion measures.  
The revision was made to make the criteria more  objective and transparent and to allow less 
competitive developing countries to benefit more from the GSP scheme."  
5. Does this revision cover the agricultu ral sector?  If so, what products are 
benefiting from it? 
 
RESPONSE:  The ceiling-based schemes had only been a pplied to industrial products, therefore 
the removal of these schemes does not matter for agricultural products. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 214 
 
 
 As the result of the revised criteria fo r application of competiveness-focused, 
product-by-exclusion measures, some agricultura l products imported from some countries were 
excluded. The information is available at the following URL. http://www.customs.go.jp/english/c-answer_e/imtsukan/1506_e.htm  
Therefore the revision was made to allow more developing countries to benefit more from the 
GSP scheme. 
 
6. Could we know the current criteria for excluding agricultural products from the 
GSP? 
RESPONSE:  Information requested in the question is available at the following URL. 
http://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/economy/gsp/index.html  
 
REPORT BY THE SECRETARIAT (WT/TPR/S/276) 
 
 III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE (1) M
EASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS  
(ii) Tariffs 
(a) Bound tariff 
 
 According to paragraph 9 of the Secret ariat report, "[i]n FY2012, Japan's tariff 
schedule comprised 9,168 lines at the HS nine-digit level.  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 w ood 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%) an d the average applied MFN tariff (6.3%) in 
FY2012 was negligible, which reflects a high degree of predictability in the tariff.  Japan has 
not used this gap to raise tariffs since its prev ious Review.  However, the average bound rate 
(WTO definition) is considerably higher for agricultural products (17.8%) than for 
non-agricultural products (3.7%).  As Japan co mpleted the implementation of its Uruguay 
Round commitments in 2009 and has no further commi tments in tariff reduction, the average for 
agricultural products is expected to remain unchanged." 
 
7. Could the Government of Japan elabora te on this by listing the agricultural 
products with the highest applied tariffs, in both non-ad valorem terms and their equivalent? 
 
RESPONSE:  As AVEs of some tariff lines cannot be provided when there are no or de minimis 
imports of the lines in the year, Japan cannot provide the list as required.  (b) Import quotas  
 Paragraph 24 of the Secretariat report st ates that "[t]he 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.  Quot a allocations are decided on an annual basis.  
Fish-related quotas are allocated based on domest ic 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 i ssued by the METI with the consent of the 
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisher ies (MAFF).  Applicants for quota allocations 
must meet various criteria.  Some quotas are a llocated on a first-come first-served basis.  
When the amount applied for exceeds remaining unallocated quota, quotas are allocated by 
lottery." 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 215 
 
 
  Paragraph 25 goes on to say that "[u]nused  quota entitlements are non-transferable and 
cannot be carried over to the next period.  Additionally, the Government does not reallocate 
any unused quotas.  A certificate of import quota allocation, normally valid for four or six months, is issued by the METI to eligible importers." 
 
8. What are the criteria and requirements  that have to be fulfilled by those who 
wish to participate in the allocation of tariff quotas? 
 
RESPONSE:  Each import quota system has its own criteria and requirements. 
Please see the METI Website below. 
http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/external_economy /trade_control/boekikanri/import/wariate/index.
htm#suisanbutsu  
(Japanese only) 
 
(viii) Standards, technical regulations, an d sanitary and phytosanitary measures 
(b) Sanitary and phytosanitary measures 
  According to paragraph 61 of the Secretar iat report, "[d]uring the period under review, 
Japan submitted 41 SPS notifications to the WTO.  Over 30 of the revisions include changes to maximum residue limits (MRLs) for pesticides a nd amendments on food additives.  According 
to the authorities, Japan has systematically re viewed 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. …"  
9. Could Japan please tell us the reasons  why no cost-benefit and analysis of these 
measures was conducted?  If Japan decide d to conduct such an analysis in the 
near future, would WTO Members be informed? 
 
RESPONSE: In order to secure safe agricultural production or safe food manufacturing for 
consumers, Japan sets the MRLs of agricultu ral chemicals or standards for use of food 
additives, etc. within the limits of ADI (Acc eptable Daily Intake) based on scientific data. 
Therefore, Japan considers that it is inappr opriate to apply cost-benefit analyses to such 
measures.  However, Japan also recognizes that it is nece ssary to examine the risk reduction effect or 
required cost associated with the applied measur es when strengthening the standards. Japan 
would like to study these matters in the future. 
 
 Paragraph 64 of the Secretariat report states that "[r]egulations under the Plant 
Quarantine Act were revised during the period under review.  Changes included:  the establishment of a quarantine pest list;  amendmen ts to the non-quarantine pest list not subject 
to phytosanitary measures;  amendments to th e current list of pest/plant/area combinations 
subject to inspection at growing sites in exporting countries;  amendments to the current list of 
pest/plant/area combinations subject to import prohibition;  and the establishment of a system 
to allow the import of prohibited items on the premise that exporting countries conduct 
conventional phytosanitary measures." 
 
10. Could the Government of Japan please provide detailed information on how the 
system to allow import of prohibited items under the Plant Quarantine Act functions? 
 
RESPONSE:  Under the Plant Protection Act, Japan may allow the import of import-banned 
items under certain conditions if the country of  origin has access to the technology for the WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 216 
 
 
 disinfestation of said items and a framework fo r using such technology reliably and properly. 
Import bans will be lifted after the exchange of scientific data on the occurrence of pests and 
disinfestation measures between the two countries, the completion of an on-site confirmatory test by a Japanese expert, and after the amen dment of the regulations has taken place. 
 
11. What are the requirements for a country to make use of this system? 
 
RESPONSE: It is necessary for the government of th e exporting country to submit a request to 
lift the ban to the Government of Japan.  (3) M
EASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE  
(iv) Intellectual property rights 
 
Border enforcement  
 Paragraph 164 of the Secretariat report notes that "[b]order 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/d enial 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 posta l shipment of IPR-infringing goods into 
Japan."  
12. Could Japan please describe some of  the measures applied by its customs 
authorities to control intellectual propert y rights violations at the border? 
 
RESPONSE: Japan Customs suspends the release of goods  if they are suspected of infringing 
on “Intellectual Property Rights” (hereinafter refe rred to as “IPR”) and initiates identification 
procedures to determine whether the goods are infringing on IPR or not. If as a result of the procedure the suspected goods are determined to be infringing on IPR, as a general rule Customs confiscates and destroys them. 
For more efficient IPR enforcement on the borde r, Customs also provides measures by which 
IPR holders may lodge an application for suspension of IPR infringing goods to Customs.  
(v) Competition policy 
(a) Recent developments  
 According to paragraph 181 of the Secr etariat report, "[t]he Anti-Monopoly Act 
(AMA) has remained unchanged since Japan's prev ious 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 pro cedure for administrative appeals;  instead, the 
bill intends to have the court receive all appeals.   The bill also seeks to further improve hearing 
procedures within the JFTC prior to issuing final orders.  The JFTC's budget amounted to 
about ¥9.0 billion in FY2012;  it has 799 officials."  
13. Has the bill that was reportedly s ubmitted to the Diet been passed yet? 
 RESPONSE: The bill was scrapped due to the dissolu tion of the House of Representatives in 
November 2012. The government is now considering what the bill should be. 
 
14. Why this change in procedure? 
 
RESPONSE: With regard to the hearing procedur e by the Japan Fair Trade Commission 
(JFTC), it has been pointed out as lacking fairness because the JFTC which issues the   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 217 
 
 
 administrative orders against violating compani es conducts its own reviews of whether or not 
the administrative orders are appropriate. The bill for amending the AMA was submitted to the 
Diet in March 2012 with a view to resolving cr iticisms on procedural fairness. (The bill was 
scrapped due to the dissolution of the House of Representatives in November 2012.) 
 
15. Why change the form for hearings - th e Court instead of the JFTC - and what 
impact does Japan hope to achieve thr ough this change in the results of 
investigations and the management of the JFTC itself? 
 RESPONSE:  The bill for amending the AMA, which was scrapped in November 2012, 
includes the abolition of the hearing procedure c onducted by the JFTC and the consignment of 
administrative review to district courts regard ing objections to administrative sanctions by the 
JFTC, and aims to achieve further enhancement a nd transparency concerning ex ante procedures 
when the JFTC takes measures.  The details of the bill are explained in the link below. 
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleas es/archives/individual-000030.html 
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleases/uploads/2010-Mar-12_2.pdf 
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleases/uploads/2010-Mar-12_3.pdf 
 
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
(1) A GRICULTURE  
(i) Structure 
 
 Paragraph 6 of the Secretariat report states that "[i]n 2010, the Government implemented a new single-year pilot direct-payment programme on rice.  The programme 
provides participating farmers with income s upport to bridge the gap between the production 
cost and the "farm gate" price of rice, irrespective of the size of farm.  In FY2011, the Government started to implement this programme  formally for rice.  The programme was also 
extended to other crops, such as wheat, barley, potatoes, buckwheat, rapeseed, sugar beet, and 
soybeans by reorganizing the existing payment schemes for these crops."  
16. What are the differences between the current payment scheme and the one 
previously applied for these crops and what are the benefits of the current scheme? 
 
RESPONSE: Support for products other than rice had already existed since before the 2010 
introduction of the payment for rice (for details, please refer to Japan's notifications up to 2009). 
In 2011, those pre-existing payments were re grouped under a common umbrella program with 
rice payment introduced in 2010, thereby reducing the administrative burden incurred by farmers. At that time, the eligibility criteria of  those pre-existing payments were relaxed to 
include all farmers who produce for the purpose of selling their products (farmers who produce 
only for self-consumption are not eligible). The r eason for including all farmers was so as not to 
suppress the potential of the small-scale but motivat ed farmers who intend to increase their farm 
size in the future. 
 
(ii) Border measures 
  Paragraph 10 of the Secretariat report stat es that "[a]s part of Japan's tariff quota 
commitments, a certain amount of imported rice may be purchased and marketed directly under the simultaneous buy-and-sell (SBS) system.  During FY2011, a total of 100,000 tonnes were imported under the SBS system.  In addition, Japan provides rice as food aid.  Japan donated 167,823 tonnes of rice in 2009 and 135,955 tonnes in 2010 as direct transfers (it also donated 
significant quantities through local and triangular  purchase arrangements).  Japan notified the 
Committee on Agriculture that it provided US$108.47 million and US$218.39 million, in 2008 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 218 
 
 
 and 2009, respectively, for the purchase of grai ns as food aid for LDCs and net food importing 
developing countries."  
17. What are the main characteristics of  the way in which this system functions? 
RESPONSE: Under the SBS system, an actual user and an importer jointly bid together for the 
tender.   According to paragraph 14 of the Secr etariat report, "[t] he Government has 
programmes to promote exports of food and agricu ltural, forestry, and fishery products.  It has 
targeted these to reach ¥1 trillion by  2020.  The authorities state that  this is to be achieved by:  
requesting importing countries to set risk management measures regarding the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident;  implementing strategic marketing under the 'Japan Brand';  and increasing the appeal of Japan's food culture to the rest of the world."  
18. Could the Government of Japan plea se list and explain each one of these 
programmes and provide us with inform ation on the budget allocated in each 
case? 
 
RESPONSE: The details on these programs are:  
・Having a diplomatic approach to importing c ountries to ease or lift their import restrictions 
on Japanese food products based on scientific grounds. 
・Publicity on the TV and the Web on Japanese food safety in response to the Nuclear Power 
Plant Accident. 
・Intensifying marketing efforts such as market  research and establishing the ”Japan Brand“ by 
supporting the marketing activities of exporters, agricultural cooperation and processed food 
manufacturers, etc.  
・Disseminating Japanese food culture, i.e. making a short movie and creating publicity for the 
promotion of Japanese foods. 
・Setting up a Japan pavilion at international exhibitions.  
・Organizing business meetings at home and abroad. 
 
The budget for the promotion of the export of fo od products is 2.2 billion yen in FY2012. There 
is no pre-determined budget allocation to each program.  (iii) Domestic measures 
 
According to paragraph 19 of the Secretariat report, "[p]ayments for wheat, barley, and soybeans were replaced by the new payment schem e based on historical entitlement, introduced 
in 2007.  A subsidy programme for starch, in troduced in 2007 provides payments to farmers 
and starch industries.  Payments for fruit were made from funds that had already been raised;  
there was no disbursement of government  support in FY2007, FY2008 or FY2009.  The 
subsidy for cocoons was abolished in 2008".  
 19. Could you please provide details on how the new payments system based on 
historical entitlements is applied? 
 RESPONSE:  Up to 2010, it was required that the fa rm size be more than 4 ha (10 ha in 
Hokkaido prefecture) in the present year in orde r to receive payments based on historical 
entitlement.  In 2011, the requirement regarding farm size in the present year was abolished. All farmers who 
produce for the purpose of selling their products are now eligible for payments regardless of the 
farm size in the present year (farmers who produ ce only for self-consumption are not eligible).   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 219 
 
 
  20. How much was paid annually per product over the past three years? 
 
RESPONSE:  By definition, payments based on histor ical entitlement cannot be allocated to 
products.  
Regarding payments for starch and fru its, they are as shown below:   
 FY  2009    2010     2011      Units (Millions of yen) 
Starch               7,220    7,074     6,541  F r u i t s                          ―     8,763   7,528 
  21. What are the main criteria of the subsidy programme for farmers and 
starch industries? 
 
RESPONSE: The sales prices of potato used for manufacturing starch and those of 
manufactured starch are consistently below their production costs. 
 
The subsidy payments for the farmers and starch  industries are made to fill the gap between 
their production costs and sales prices based on th e Sugar and Starch price Adjustment Law. 
 
(5) S
ERVICES  
(ii) Telecommunications  
Paragraph 66 of the Secretariat report states th at "Japan's legislation does not distinguish 
between basic telecommunication providers a nd value-added telecomm unications providers, 
but since 2004, has distinguished between regist ered and notified carriers.  This replaced the 
distinction between type I and type II carriers,  i.e. facilities-based and non-facilities-based.  
The new distinction, triggered by technological developments, is between  large and small-scale 
facilities.  Carriers whose activities go beyond the boundaries of a single prefecture are considered as registered operators.  Registra tion formalities and procedures with the Ministry 
of Internal Affairs and Communication (MIC) are minimal;  and the notification regime 
requires no investigation or authorization." 
 
22. What are the enterprises s ubject to the notification regime? 
23. What is the main difference between the two regimes? 
 
RESPONSE: Any entity which installs telecommunications  line facilities, such as optical fibers 
and base stations, and any entity which provi des communication services for customers through 
the use of telecommunications facilities are subject to the regulations of the Telecommunications Business Act. Carriers who operate major-scale telecommunications business including the installation of telecommuni cations line facilities across an administrative 
area of a province or municipality are subject to the notification regime, and carriers who operate a smaller-scale telecommunications busin ess are subject to the registration regime. For 
example, a telecommunications business whic h operates its own service by using a mobile 
phone line installed by an outside source and doesn’t have its own telecommunications line 
facilities, and a telecommunications business which provides communications services between customers only by installing telecommunications facilities such as servers are subject to the 
notification regime. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 220 
 
 
 27.MEXICO 
Questions from Mexico 
Government report Paragraph 62 
1. Please provide further information on the Council for the Promotion of Regulatory 
Reform. 
 
RESPONSE: 
The Council of the Promotion of Regulatory Re form (CPRR) has been established as an 
advisory body to the Prime Minister and it will investigate and deliberate on regulatory reforms 
necessary for the structural reform of the Japanese economy and society. 
 2. Please elaborate on the outcomes it reported to the Prime Minister and its relationship 
with the Headquarters for the Promotion of Regulatory Reform. 
 RESPONSE:  
The outcomes that the Council for the Promotion of Regulatory Reform (CPRR) reported to the 
Prime Minister culminated in "The Three-Year Program for Promoting Regulatory Reform" decided by the Cabinet. The Headquarters for the Promotion of Regulatory Reform (HPRR) 
consists of the Prime Minister and all of the cabinet members as well as members including the 
chairperson of CPRR, and CPRR reported outcomes of its investigations and deliberations to 
HPRR. HPRR was terminated in March 2010. (Reference) http://www8.cao.go.jp/kisei-kaika ku/publication/2009/0331/index.html  (Japanese Only) 
 
3. The same paragraph states that the Counc il was terminated in 2010. Why was it 
terminated? 
RESPONSE: 
This occurred because the term of the Council w as for a period of 3 years, which had elapsed. 
 
Paragraph 63 
4. Please specify the objectives and functions of the Subcommittee  on Regulatory and 
Institutional Reform? 
RESPONSE: 
The Subcommittee on Regulatory and Institutional Reform (SRIR) was to investigate and 
deliberate on regulatory reforms just like the C ouncil for the Promotion of Regulatory Reform.  
SRIR was terminated in December 2012. 
 
5. Please elaborate on whether the working groups are responsible only for examining 
technical regulations in these areas or also for developing such regulations. 
RESPONSE: 
The Working Groups established under SRIR were to conduct reviews of existing regulations 
and systems, while the relevant ministries we re responsible for revising and abolishing them. 
 
6. Please explain which body was responsible, in 2012, for reviewing or developing 
technical regulations that fall outside th e scope of the working groups (e.g. in 
relation to pharmaceutical products, cosmetics, etc.). 
 
RESPONSE: 
Almost all of the ministries are relevant parti es since the cabinet decided on more than 200 
items of regulatory reform in 2012. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 221 
 
 
 7. Is the Committee on Regulatory and Ins titutional Reform now responsible for 
developing and reviewing technical regul ations? Does it include all products or 
those covered by the previously established working groups? 
 RESPONSE: 
No.  The Committee on Regulatory and Institutio nal Reform was terminated in December 
2012.  The Council for the Promotion of Regulat ory Reform established in January 2013 is 
currently responsible for conducting review s of existing regulations and systems. 
 
Paragraph 65 
8. Is it possible to know the results of the Co mmittee's review on existing regulations and 
systems? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Yes.  Please visit the following website  (only Japanese version is available): 
http://www.cao.go.jp/sasshin/kisei-seido/publication/p_index.html  
 
Paragraph 79 
9. Does the Customs Law grant th e customs authority ex officio power to detain goods 
that infringe intellectual property rights, whether they be imports, exports or in 
transit at customs? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Regarding the scope of the IPR border enforc ement by Japan Customs on import and export 
goods, please refer to the following website.  
http://www.customs.go.jp/mizugiwa/chiteki/pages/a_003_e.htm  
 
Japan Customs also has an aut hority to enforce on transit goods which infringe on IPR, the 
scope of which is the same as import goods.. 
 
Paragraph 80, section (1) 
10. Is the disclosure of a trade secret the onl y behaviour classed as an offence under 
this legislation? 
 
RESPONSE: 
The regulations in paragraph 80 (1), which prevent the disclosure of trade secrets in the criminal 
procedure, only apply to the public trail of a trade secret infringement. 
 
Paragraph 80, section (2) 
11. Please provide further information on acts relating to devices and programs used to 
circumvent technological measures. 
RESPONSE: 
The Unfair Competition Prevention Act prohibits act s of offering, delivering, displaying for the 
purpose of assignment or delivery, exporting or  importing devices  having the function of 
enabling the viewing of images or hearing of sounds, the running of programs, or the recording of images, sounds or programs which are restricted by technological restriction measures that are used in business, by obstructing the effect of  such technological restriction measures, or data 
storage media or machines on which programs ha ving such function have been recorded, or acts 
of providing programs having such function through an electric telecommunication line. 
 
Paragraph 82 
12. Reference is made to amendments to the Copyright Act. Please elaborate on the 
amendments made regarding limitations on copyright. 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 222 
 
 
 RESPONSE: 
Japan amended its Copyright Act as follows;. 
(a)Creation of provisions regarding incidental appearance of something in a photo, etc Provisions that prescribe that the following activ ities of using copyrighted works do not infringe 
on copyrights, etc., are created. 
- Use of incidental copyrighted works  - Use of copyrighted works that is deemed  necessary during the stage of carrying out 
examinations to obtain permission, etc.  
- Use of copyrighted works for trials for tec hnology development or practical application  
- Use of copyrighted works for information pr ocessing necessary for preparation for information 
provision through the use of information and communication technologies  
 (b) Creation of provisions regarding automatic pub lic transmission of library materials by the 
National Diet Library The National Diet Library may carry out automatic  public transmission of out-of-print materials 
and other library materials to libraries, etc. At th e same time, libraries, etc., may, at the request 
of users, partially reproduce out-of-print materi als and other library materials received from the 
National Diet Library through automatic public transmission.  (c) Creation of provisions regarding the use of  copyrighted works based  on the Public Records 
and Archives Management Act, etc. 
For purposes such as to provide co pyrighted works, etc., to the public in accordance with the 
provisions of the Public Records and Archives Management Act, etc., the President of the 
National Archives of Japan, etc., may, to the exte nt necessary, use the co pyrighted works, etc. 
 
13. Please describe the amendments made  regarding technological protection 
measures. 
 
RESPONSE: 
In addition to protection technologies that were  covered by technological protection measures 
for copyrights, etc. under the previous law (technologies based on signal-addition methods that 
are used for VHS and other formats), cryptographic technologies (technologies that are used for 
DVD and other formats) are also newly covere d by technological protection measures, and 
provisions to regulate the evasion of technological protection measures based on cryptographic technologies have been  created. 
 
Secretariat report 
Chapter III Paragraph 44 
14. Please elaborate on how the Standards In formation Services, both within the 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Business Service Department, are coordinated. 
 
RESPONSE: The Standards Information Service within the In ternational Trade Division of the Ministry of 
the Foreign Affairs initially receives a TBT enquiry as the enquiry point under the TBT Agreement. Then it requests relevant ministries and agencies in charge of the subject of the 
enquiry to make a response, compiles th e response and responds to the enquirer. 
 
15. Please explain which sectors are covered by the technical regulations mentioned in 
paragraph 46 of Chapter III of the Secretariat report. 
 
RESPONSE: 
From July 2010 until the end of 2012, Japan has made 74 technical regulation notifications to 
the WTO, which are G/TBT/N/JPN337-412. For detailed information, please refer to these   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 223 
 
 
 notifications. For reference, breakdown by the ministries are as follows: 34 by the Ministry of 
Health, Labour and Welfare; 11 by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications; 10 by 
the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry; 7 by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, among others.  Paragraph 52 
16. How are RCBs and ROCBs coordinated? 
 
RESPONSE: 
In cases where registered certifying bodies or registered overseas certifying bodies certify 
operators, in principle one certifying body shall co nduct a series of steps involved in certifying a 
business from accepting the application to issu ing a certificate. However, based on the 
provisions of the ISO/IEC17065, registered certifying bodies and registered overseas certifying bodies can subcontract some parts of the certifie d business. As an illustration, a registered 
certifying body had consigned an on-site assessment to a foreign operator of a registered 
overseas certifying body. 
 
17. What process must exporters follo w to obtain these certificates? 
 The processes that exporters must go through to be certified are the same as those of 
manufacturers. Exporters submit application forms as prescribed in the Enforcement 
Regulations for JAS Law to registered (ove rseas) certifying bodies. Registered (overseas) 
certifying bodies then conduct assessments of t hose application forms and on-site assessments. 
If the registered (overseas) certifying body c onfirms their conformity with The Technical 
Criteria for Certifying, those exporters obtain certification. 
 
Paragraph 59 
18. How do the foreign inspection bodies work? 
 
RESPONSE: 
The designated foreign inspection bodies are allowe d to issue of testing results documents on 
machines required by the Industrial Safety an d Health Law.  The test results of a 
foreign-manufactured product conducted by the designated foreign inspection bodies are taken 
into consideration in the inspection at the time of import to Japan. 
 
(iv) Intellectual property rights 
Paragraph 130 
19. The text states that the pendency of first official action in the examination of 
patents relating to environmental technolo gy was shortened from 22 to two months. 
What measures were taken to ach ieve this reduction in time? 
 
RESPONSE: 
In order to provide early protection of findings of green technology that is 
environmentally-friendly and to further promote re search and development of that technology, 
the JPO started a pilot program on accelerated examination for green technology related applications in 2009. Under this program, the JPO gives priority to examining patent applications pertaining to green technology upon request by applicants.   Paragraph 151 
20. Could Japan please explain how its geogr aphical indications system under the 
Trademarks Act and the Unfair Competition Prevention Act works, and how it applies to foreign geographical indications? 
  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 224 
 
 
 RESPONSE: 
(Trademark Act) 
Concerning Article 22 of the TRIPS Agreement, trademarks that contain GIs including foreign 
GIs or that consist of GIs, which may cause mi sunderstanding of origin (quality of goods) are 
rejected or invalidated based on Article 4 (1) (xvi) of the Trademark Act. 
 With regard to “Additional Protection for GIs fo r Wines and Spirits” (Article 23 of the TRIPS 
Agreement), for trademarks that indicate the orig in of wines or spirits produced in Japan or a 
member state of the WTO, the trademarks prohib ited in the Member to be used for wines or 
spirits not originating in a region of the Member and used for wines or spirits not originating in 
a region in the member, are rejected or invalidated based on Article 4 (1) (xvii) of the Trademark Act.  (The Unfair Competition Prevention Act) Article 2 (1) (xiii) of the Unfair Compe tition Prevention Act prohibits the acts of 
misrepresenting information regarding the place of  origin, including foreig n GIs, on goods in a 
manner that is likely to mislead the public. 
 
Paragraph 155 
21. Under section (d), paragraph 155 refers to the extension of limitations on 
copyright. Which limitations were extended? 
 
RESPONSE: 
In the amendments of the Copyright Act in 2009, the following provisions were newly 
introduced to facilitate the exploitation of co pyrighted works over the Internet: Article 47 
quinquies (reproduction for the prevention, etc. of a difficulty in transmission), Article 47 sexies 
(reproduction etc. for a retrieval, etc. of a diffi culty in the transmitter identification code of 
information which has been made transmittabl e), Article 47 septies (reproduction, etc. for 
analyzing information), Article 47 octies (reproduc tion for exploitation of works which is based 
on a computer.) 
 
Paragraph 156 
22. Please describe the free-use mark system that is implemented for the use of 
copyrighted works. 
 
RESPONSE: 
Free-use marks are marks which indicate the will of an author of copyrighted works when he or 
she allows others to freely use them without author ization, and is a system used to promote easy 
the use of copyrighted works. There are three types of free-u se marks, which are (i) a mark 
which only authorizes the printing out of, reproductio n of or free distribution of material, (ii) a 
mark which only allows for use for non-prof it-making purposes for persons with disabilities, 
and (iii) a mark which only allows for use fo r non-profit-making purposes in school education. 
 Paragraph 162 
23. Under section (e), paragraph 162 refers  to the "IPR Overseas Infringement 
Investigation Program". What does this program consist of and how does it work? 
 
RESPONSE: It is a program in which The Intellectual Propert y Protection Office investigates other country's 
IPR infringement problem based on the claims fro m right holders. As for the past claims, one 
was concerned with business name system in Hong-Kong, and the other was about trademark 
law in Turkey. In addition, the Office also investigated the third claim about pirated DVD 
problem in Malaysia. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 225 
 
 
 Paragraph 164 
With regard to the border measur es referred to in paragraph 164: 
24. In what circumstances are goods seized and in what circumstances are they denied 
entry? 
 RESPONSE: 
The numbers of the case and items Japan Cu stoms seized as goods infringing Intellectual 
Property Rights are reported in Paragraph 1 64 of the Report by the WTO Secretariat. 
 
25. Who is responsible for warehousing costs in respect of goods seized at customs? 
 
RESPONSE 
Importers, in principle, have to pay the costs for storage of imported goods. 
Even in cases where the goods are determined to  infringe on IPR, importers have to pay the 
costs for storage until the confiscation by Custom s. After the confiscation, Japan Customs bears 
the cost. 
 
26. Where do seized infringing goods go? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Regarding the destination of IPR-infringing g oods Japan Customs seizes on exports, please refer 
to the table below.  Number of Cases 
( )・Number of Items Seized 
 
 2009 2010 2011 
Hong Kong 06 （14） 2（3） 
The Philippines 1（3） 1（1） 1（4） 
Afghanistan 00 1 （2） 
Vietnam 01（4,000） 0 
China 01 （676） 0 
Singapore 0 1（20） 0 
Pakistan 1（5） 00  
Total 2（8） 10（4,711） 4（9） 
 
27. Does the customs authority have the power to determine whether intellectual 
property rights have been violated? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Japan Customs has the authority to determine whether goods infringe on Intellectual Property 
Rights or not through identification procedures in which Customs seeks both the opinions of right holders and importers. 
 
28. How long does it take to determine that goods at customs are infringing goods? 
 RESPONSE: WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 226 
 
 
 As a general rule, Japan Customs makes a determination within a month.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 227 
 
 
 28. COSTA RICA 
 
QUESTIONS FROM COSTA RICA 
 
PARTE I:  PREGUNTAS EN RELACIÓN CON EL INFORME DE LA 
SECRETARÍA  Página 3 (párrafo 5) 
 
En septiembre de 2012, las autoridades hicier on pública la Estrategia innovadora para la 
energía y el medio ambiente. Estas políticas son la base de la estrategia energética del Japón, fundamentada en tres principios básicos: lograr una sociedad no dependiente de la energía nuclear, llevar a cabo una revolución energética ecológica y establecer un suministro estable de energía.  
Pregunta: 
 
1. ¿Podría Japón ampliar en qué c onsiste la Estrategia innovado ra para la energía y el 
medio ambiente?  2. ¿Cuáles son los resultados esperados y a qué plazo esperan obtenerlos? 
 
RESPONSE:  After the Great East Japan Earthquake, the former government developed the 
new energy policy “Innovative Energy and the Environment Strategy.” This strategy was designed to strive to reduce dependence on nuc lear energy as well as on fossil fuels, by 
maximizing green energy such as making use of efficient energy and renewable energy 
systems. 
However, the new government is currently co nducting a zero-based review of the energy and 
environment strategy of the former government and is forging a responsible energy policy by 
taking account of the need for stable energy su pply as well as the reduction of energy costs. 
 
※Innovative Energy and the Environment Strategy 
http://www.npu.go.jp/en/policy/po licy06/pdf/201210 04/121004_en2.pdf  
(Outline) 
http://www.npu.go.jp/en/policy/po licy06/pdf/201209 24/20120924_en.pdf  
 
Página 22 (Párrafo 34) 
 
Además de los requisitos de aprobación (no tificación previa) establecidos en la Ley de 
Cambios y Comercio Exterior, otras leyes impone n restricciones específicas a las entradas de 
IED en actividades tales como la adquisición de tierras, la minería y los sectores del petróleo, 
las telecomunicaciones y el transporte. 
 
Pregunta: 
 3. ¿Existen sectores de servicios para los que se requiere notificación previa y su 
correspondiente aprobación oficial? ¿De ser así, cuáles? 
 
RESPONSE:  There are certain service sectors in which prior notification and its 
corresponding official screening are required, considering that “significant adverse effects on the smooth management of the national econom y” (Foreign Exchange and Foreign Trade 
Act, Article 27(3)(b)) may be produced by in ward FDI, for example, maritime transport 
services. On the grounds of public order, public  safety and national security, the following 
sectors are also subject to screening: nuclear pow er, electric utilities, gas utilities, water, heat 
generation, telecommunications, television a nd cable television, and broadcasting.  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 228 
 
 
 Página 27 párrafo 10) 
 
La estructura del arancel NMF aplicado del Japón no ha experimentado mayores cambios 
desde el anterior examen de sus políticas comerciales. Se aplic an derechos ad valorem al 
93,3% de las 9.168 líneas arancelarias (el 40, 5% están libres de derechos), derechos 
específicos al 2,6%, y derechos alternativos y derechos compuestos al 3,2% y al 0,6%, 
respectivamente. Se aplican otros tipos (derechos  diferenciales y derechos móviles) al 0,3% 
de las líneas arancelarias.   
Preguntas: 
 
4. ¿Podría Japón indicar a cuáles productos se les aplican los derechos diferenciales y 
derechos móviles?   RESPONSE:  It is not clear what “mobile duties” stand for, but if they mean “sliding duties”, 
the duties concerned are applied to pork, onion, alloys of copper, lead and zinc. 
 5. Para el caso de los derechos específicos, ¿cómo se determina el precio oficial de 
importación fijado por las autoridades y el precio de importación real? 
 
RESPONSE: The standard import price is stipulated in the Temporary Tariff Measures Law 
in consistent with Japan’s tariff schedule. For example, the standard import prices for 
minerals are decided at the level where both th e nonferrous metals industries and the users 
can accept based on the requests from both sides.  
 Página 36 (Párrafo 27) 
 En 2011, el precio medio del tabaco en rama de producción nacional ascendía a 1.865 yen por kg, más del triple del precio medio del ta baco en rama importado (542 yen por kg). 
 Pregunta: 
 6. Dado el diferencial de precios entre los productos nacionales y los importados; 
¿Cómo Garantiza Japón la no discriminación de los bienes importados dentro del proceso de compra que realizan las empresas del Estado? 
 
RESPONSE:  Concerning importing of leaf tobacco, JT imports leaf tobacco on the basis of 
commercial consideration, taking into account th e supply and demand status of manufactured 
tobacco, as well as quality, market price and other relevant characteristics of leaf tobacco. As Japan does not impose any restrictions on the importing of leaf tobacco, a principle of 
non-discrimination toward imported goods has been ensured in this regard. 
 
Página 52 (párrafo 81) 
 
Los derechos de importación (aranceles) que gravan las materias primas utilizadas en la producción de determinados bienes de expor tación pueden ser objeto de exenciones, 
reducciones o reembolsos, si el gobierno lo estima conveniente. 
 
Pregunta: 
 7. ¿Cuál es el criterio para otorgar la de volución del pago por los derechos de 
importación?     WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 229 
 
 
 RESPONSE: The tax refund systems are stipulated in  Paragraph2 of Article10, Article19-2, 
19-3, 20 of the Customs Tariff Law. For the specific information on the purpose of  the systems and outlines, please refer to the 
page on Customs website below. 
http://www.customs.go.jp/english/c-answer_e/imtsukan/1602_e.htm  
 
Página 70 (Párrafo 147) 
 Se indica que en abril de 2005 Japón introdujo un sistema de examen acelerado especial para 
los dibujos y modelos a fin de luchar contra las falsificaciones. Se explica que en el marco de 
este sistema, el tiempo transcurrido hasta la respuesta inicial se redujo a un mes, lo que impidió efectivamente los posibles usos no autorizados por parte de terceros. 
 Pregunta: 
 
8. ¿Podría Japón ampliar sobre cuáles son las características del examen acelerado?  
 
RESPONSE:  In addition to the conventional accele rated examination system for design 
applications introduced in 1987, a special accel erated examination system to address design 
counterfeiting was introduced in April 2005.  Upon request by the applicant, a design 
application can be subject to the system when 1) the design in the application is being used 
by the applicant or the licensee and 2) it is appa rent that a third party is using or is making 
considerable preparations to use an identical or a similar design to the design without the 
consent of the applicant or the licensee.  
Under this system, the first notice of examina tion results (the first action) will be issued 
within one month from the date of the request, as long as no deficiency has been found in the request and application (under the conventional accelerated examination system: within 3.5 
months). In 2011, 12 requests were made for the special accelerated examination and the 
average period for the issue of the first action was 0.8 months. 
 
Página 72 (Párrafo 152) 
 
Hasta el momento se han reconocido cinc o indicaciones geográficas correspondientes a 
licores japoneses: Iki, Kuma, Ryukyu, Satsuma y Hakusan.  
Pregunta: 
 
9. ¿Podría Japón indicar si se han reconocido indicaciones geográficas no japonesas? 
De ser así, ¿Cuál ha sido el proced imiento para su reconocimiento? 
 RESPONSE: In Japan, additional protection for GIs for wines and spirits is domestically 
implemented in accordance with the Standard for Indication in Relation to Geographical 
Indications(hereinafter referred to as “the St andards”) based on the Law Concerning Liquor 
Business Association and Measures fo r Securing Revenue from Liquor Tax. 
 In accordance with the Standards, indications fo r wines and spirits are protected without any 
need for designation as GIs, in cases where the indication satisfies the requirement (or 
so-called criteria) provided for in the provisi ons of paragraph 1 of the Article 22 of the 
TRIPS Agreement and where the territory, region or  a locality related to the indication is of a 
member of the WTO other than Japan.  
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 230 
 
 
 Under such domestic scheme, no indication of a place of origin for wines nor spirits of a 
country other than Japan has been designated by Commissioner of the National Tax Agency 
as a GI. 
 
Página 96 (párrafo 43) 
 Con arreglo a las disposiciones de la Ley de  Cambios y Comercio Exterior, las entidades 
extranjeras que deseen realizar inversiones en servicios de suministro de electricidad y gas 
deben notificar su intención a las autoridades competentes, incluido el METI. Según las 
autoridades, sólo se deniega la autorización por  motivos de seguridad nacional. Al parecer, 
ha habido pocas inversiones en el sector de la energía y los servicios públicos.  Pregunta: 
 10. ¿Por qué razones se considera que exista tan poca inversión en el sector de energía y 
de servicios públicos? 
 
RESPONSE: Each investment is executed based on the business decisions of private 
enterprises.  
 Página 99 (párrafo 48) 
 Las principales disposiciones de la Ley de pr ivatización de los servicios postales revisada son 
las siguientes: el número de filiales de Japan  Post Holding se reducirá de cuatro a tres 
mediante la integración de los servicios postal es y los servicios de red de Correos del Japón; 
Japan Post Group tendrá que suministrar, de ma nera unificada a través de su red de oficinas 
postales, servicios postales universales y un acceso  equitativo en todo el Japón a los servicios 
de ahorro y de seguros; Japan Post Holdings tr atará de vender cuanto antes todas las acciones 
de Japan Post Bank y Japan Post Insurance,  teniendo en cuenta las condiciones económicas 
de ambas empresas y las consecuencias de la aplicación de la ley respecto de la responsabilidad de garantizar el suministro de  servicios postales básicos; la proporción 
mínima de acciones que debe mantener el Gobierno en todo momento no se ha revisado y 
sigue siendo de un tercio; a rese rva de la adopción de  nuevos reglamentos, Japan Post Bank y 
Japan Post Insurance podrán comercializar nuevos  productos (por ejemplo, seguros médicos) 
dentro del mismo marco normativo que sus homól ogos del sector privado tan pronto como el 
Gobierno haya vendido la mitad de sus acciones,  y se permitirá la propiedad cruzada entre 
filiales de Japan Post Holdings. 
 Preguntas: 
 11. ¿Existen restricciones para empresas extr anjeras que quieran adquirir acciones de 
Japan Post Holdings?  
RESPONSE: The Government of Japan has the respons ibility of constantly holding over 1/3 
of the shares of the Japan Post  Holdings. At the same time, it will dispose its shares in the 
Japan Post Holdings, other than the ones to be held by the Government, at the earliest 
possible time. There is no restriction on fore ign investment in Japan Post Holdings.  
cf. Article 7 of the Postal Services Privatization Act (Act No.97 of 2005), Article 2 of the Act 
on Japan Post Holdings Co. Ltd., (Act No.98 of 2005) and Article 3 of the Supplementary 
Provisions of the Act.  12. La proporción mínima de acciones del Gobier no es de un tercio. En la práctica, 
¿mantiene el gobierno el mínimo de un terc io o una proporción mayor de las acciones de 
Japan Post?   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 231 
 
 
 RESPONSE: At present, the Government holds all of  the issued shares of Japan Post’s 
stock.  
Página 100 (párrafo 51) 
 
“No hay bancos ni compañías de seguros de propi edad estatal, aparte de Correos del Japón, el 
Banco de Desarrollo del Japón, el Banco de Cooperación Internacional del Japón, la 
Corporación de Crédito del Japón y la Corpor ación de Crédito para el Desarrollo de 
Okinawa. La participación extranjera en los ser vicios bancarios sigue siendo marginal; sólo 
un banco tiene una participación extranjera  superior al 50% (el banco Aozora).” 
 Pregunta: 
 13. ¿Cuáles considera Japón que son las razon es para que exista una participación 
extranjera tan baja en los servicios bancarios?  
RESPONSE: Regulations on investment in the bank ing sector apply to both domestic and 
foreign investors alike in a non-discriminatory manner. Whether foreign investors actually invest in the Japanese banking sector or not is their own investment decisions. The Government of Japan is not in a position to make comments on their decisions. 
 
Página 105 (párrafos 60, 61 y 62) 
 
Estos párrafos detallan el nivel de liberalización en materia de seguros y servicios bancarios, 
en los que se mantiene un compromiso similar al adquirido en el marco del AGCS. 
 
Pregunta: 
 14. ¿Existen planes para alcanzar un nivel de  liberalización AGCS plus en materia de 
seguros y servicios bancarios? 
 
RESPONSE:  As shown in Japan’s Schedule of  Commitments, Japan adopted the 
Understanding on Commitments in Financial Services and already conducted high-level 
liberalization in financial services incl uding the insurance and banking sectors. 
 
Página 108 (párrafo 68) 
 
“Por ley, el Gobierno tendrá una participación del 33,3% en la Empresa Nacional Nipona de 
Telégrafos y Teléfonos (NTT). Es el único caso de propiedad pública en el sector. El 31 de 
marzo de 2012, la participación extranjera en  la NTT era del 24,2% según el informe anual 
obligatorio sobre valores de las empresas que cotizan en Bolsa. En el cuadro IV.11 se 
detallan el régimen normativo de las tele comunicaciones del Japón y sus principales 
indicadores económicos.”  
Pregunta: 
 15. ¿La participación del Gobierno del 33.3%  en NTT es un mínimo o es exactamente 
la proporción que el Gobierno man tiene actualmente en la empresa? 
 
RESPONSE: The 33.3% Government ownership of NTT is the minimum rate and this 
number also represents the actual current Gove rnment ownership, which is calculated in 
accordance with NTT law.  Página 111 (párrafo 73) 
Los regímenes de comercio de servicios de  telecomunicaciones del Japón son en general WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 232 
 
 
 bastante abiertos (…) Las únicas reservas form uladas en los compromisos en el marco del 
AGCS y de los ALC son la limitación de la participación extranjera en la NTT (1/5 en el marco del AGCS y 1/3 en el de los ALC y, a través del statu quo establecido para algunos ALC, en el régimen aplicado), y el requisito de nacionalidad japonesa para los auditores y los 
miembros del consejo de ad ministración de la NTT. 
 Pregunta: 
 16. ¿Podría indicar Japón si existen planes para extender el umbral de 1/3 a los demás 
países miembros del AGCS? 
 RESPONSE: Given NTT’s important public role, including responsibilities such as 
providing universal services, promoting research, and disseminating research results, the Government became a stable shareholder in  order to prevent any domination of NTT 
management or abuse of shareholder rights by specific entities. This en sures the stability of 
company management and appropriate bus iness operations. For those reasons, the 
Government is obliged to hold NTT shares.  Therefore, there is no plan to either relax or abolish the above measures at this point in time. 
 
Página 112 (Cuadro IV.12) 
 
En este cuadro se consigna que existen 0 bu ques de propiedad extranjera que portan el 
pabellón nacional.  Pregunta: 
 17. ¿Podría aclarar Japón si está prohibido a embarcaciones de propiedad extranjera 
portar el pabellón nacional?  RESPONSE:  Japan provides the requirements for sh ips allowed to fl y the Japanese flag 
defined by the Ship Law (Law No.46 of 1899). Pursuant to Article 2, only Japanese ships are 
allowed to fly the Japanese flag. Pursuant to Item 2 of Article 1, foreign nationals are 
prohibited to own Japanese ships. However, in  cases where a company owns a Japanese ship, 
the company shall comply with the following requi rements described in Item 3 of Article 1: 
1. The company shall be established in accord ance with the laws and ordinances of Japan; 
and 
2. All representatives and no less than two-th irds of the company’s executives must be 
Japanese nationals.  
Página 115 (párrafo 82) 
 
Todos los aeropuertos son de titularidad y gestión pública, si bien un documento 
recientemente publicado en el que se define la estrategia a medio y largo plazo del sector de 
la aviación menciona la posibilidad de esta blecer un régimen de concesión e incluso de que 
se privatice el sector. También está previsto reest ructurar el régimen de tasas de aterrizaje, 
con objeto de dar preferencia a las aeronav es de pequeñas y medianas dimensiones, 
promover el desarrollo de los transportistas de bajo costo e impulsar la política de cielos 
abiertos. 
 Pregunta: 
18. ¿Es ésta una política nacional? ¿Existen plan es concretos para otorgar en concesión 
o privatizar los aeropuertos? 
 
RESPONSE:  The New-Kansai International Airport Co. Ltd (NKIAC) was newly   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 233 
 
 
 established in April 2012 based on a law passed in  the Diet, operating Kansai Int. Airport 
(KIX) and Itami Airport (ITM), which are locat ed in Kansai district, the second largest 
economic area in Japan. This motion aims at in creasing the enterprise value of both airports 
and at early concession contract realization as soon as possible (by 2014 at the earliest) for 
the purpose of reforming/strengthening KIX as our nation's international hub airport and 
increasing demands for aviation in Kansai through  the appropriate and effective utilization of 
KIX & ITM. As for the 28 national airports, in order to make them serve as a focal point for regional 
vitalization by bringing more tourists and vis itors, we are considering unifying aeronautical 
and non-aeronautical activities according to local needs and context, and to make use of the 
management abilities of private sectors to impr ove the efficiency of airport governance. 
 
PARTE II:  PREGUNTAS EN RELACIÓN CON EL INFORME DEL GOBIERNO 
 
Página 6 (párrafo 6) 
 
Por regiones: En el año civil de 2011, la IED del Japón aumentó a 1.187,9 millardos de yen (el 52,1%) en América del Norte, a 3.120,9 milla rdos de yen (el 64%) en Asia, ya 3.143,7 
millardos de yen (el 146%) en  Europa y a 878.600 millones de  yen y (el 83,3%) en América 
Central y del Sur. 
 
Pregunta: 
 19. ¿En cuáles sectores invirtió Japón en América Central y del Sur? ¿Es posible 
obtener la desagregación por país? 
 
RESPONSE: According to Balance of Payments statis tics, direct investment from Japan to 
Central and South American countries was 878.6 bi llion yen in 2011. As to the breakdown of 
the above figure, food (359.7 billion yen) and mining industry (147.2 billion yen) were the 
most heavily invested sectors. Japan publishes the data on outward and inward  direct investment by country and industry on 
the website below. 
http://www.boj.or.jp/en/statistics/br/bop/index.htm/  
 
Página 11, Cuadro Acuerdos de Asociación  Económica en los que es parte el Japón 
 
Preguntas: 
20. ¿Cuáles son las perspectivas para la reanud ación en el corto y mediano plazo de las 
negociaciones con Corea del Sur?  RESPONSE: While Japan has conducted consultations with South Korea regarding the 
resumption of Japan-Korea EPA negotiations, th e EPA negotiations have not been resumed 
at present. 
 21. ¿Cómo visualizan la incorporación de los avances alcanzados hasta la fecha en la 
negociación con Corea del Sur, a la negociaci ón del acuerdo tripartito China-Japón-Corea? 
 
RESPONSE: Negotiations on an FTA among Japan, China and Korea will commence anew 
as a different framework from the currently suspended Japan- Korea bilateral EPA/FTA 
negotiations.  In the negotiations on a trilateral FTA, inter ests and concerns between Japan and Korea will 
surely be addressed. Having said this, outcomes of  Japan- Korea bilateral negotiations of the 
past will not necessarily be reflected. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 234 
 
 
 Página 17 (Párrafo 50) 
 
En julio de 2012, la Dieta aprobó el proyecto de ley de emplazamiento de empresas asiáticas 
(Ley de medidas especiales para promover l as actividades de investigación y desarrollo de 
empresas multinacionales autorizadas). El objetiv o de la Ley es atraer a empresas mundiales 
mediante el establecimiento en el Japón de nuevos centros de I+D y sedes regionales asiáticas; a las empresas mundiales autorizadas por  el Ministro competente se les ofrecerán 
desgravaciones del impuesto de sociedades, derechos de patent es reducidos y otros 
incentivos. 
 
Pregunta: 
 22. ¿Podría Japón ampliar sobre los otros in centivos que se ofrecen en la Ley de 
medidas especiales para promover actividades de investigación y desarrollo de empresas multinacionales autorizadas? ¿Podrían estos tener efectos discriminatorios? 
 
RESPONSE: Incentives offered by the Act on Special Measures for the Promotion of 
Research and Development by Certified Multinational Enterprise are as below: - Deduction of taxable income for 5 years 
- Tax deferral of the stock option benefit  
- Reduction of patent fees  - Reduction of time period required for investment procedures - Assistance for fund raising  
These incentives are offered on a non-discriminatory basis, and thus they do not have any 
discriminatory effect.  
Página 23 (Párrafo 82) 
 
Ante el desarrollo de la digitalización y del estab lecimiento de redes, el Japón modificó en 
2012 su Ley del Derecho de Autor. Japón indica que las principales modificaciones 
introducidas son la inclusión del denominado "u so incidental" y la modificación de las 
disposiciones relacionadas con las medidas de protección tecnológica. Preguntas: 
 
23. ¿Cómo define la ley japonesa la limitaci ón del derecho de autor denominada “uso 
incidental”? ¿Qué medidas se han adoptado pa ra asegurar que no cons tituyan estos usos una 
explotación encubierta de la obra protegida?  RESPONSE:  The limitation and exception which we call “incidental use” is stipulated in the 
Article 30 bis of Copyright Act.  
Reproduction or adoption of “an incidental objective work”, when the said work is created by 
taking photographs etc., is permitted because th e incidental objective work is not separable 
from a main object of the photographic or audio works. Such reproduced or adopted “incidental objective work” can be used in association with the photographic or audio work 
which contains the said “incidental objective work”. 
 
Whether a certain use of a work is considered  as “incidental use” and thus does not constitute 
an infringement is judged based on the difficulty of separatability of an incidental objective work from a photographic or other work.  A final judgment is made by judicial authority on a case by case basis. 
 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 235 
 
 
 24. ¿En qué sentido se han modificado las disposiciones relacionadas con medidas de 
protección tecnológica? ¿De qué forma pretende n lograr una protección más adecuada de los 
derechos de autor?  
RESPONSE: In addition to protection technologies that were covered by technological 
protection measures for copyrights, etc. unde r the previous law (technologies based on 
signal-addition methods that are used for VHS and other formats), cryptographic technologies (technologies that are used for DVD and other formats) are also covered by technological protection measures, and provisions to regulate the evasion of technological 
protection measures based on cryptographic technologies are laid down. 
 
Página 23 (párrafo 83) 
 
El Organismo de Servicios Financieros (FSA) adoptó diversas medidas, como la 
promulgación de la Ley sobre medidas provisi onales para facilitar la financiación de las 
pequeñas y medianas empresas (PYME), etc., con el fin de facilitar la financiación, en el 
momento en que las PYME empezaron a experime ntar problemas financieros en el otoño de 
2008 debido a la crisis financiera mundial.  Pregunta: 
 25. ¿Podría indicar Japón si las empresas extranjeras se benefician también de esas 
medidas de facilitación de la financiación?  RESPONSE:  The Act on Temporary Measures to Facilitate Financing for Small and 
Medium-Sized Enterprise, etc. applies to bo th domestically owned and foreign-owned SMEs 
incorporated in Japan.  
Página 23 (párrafo 83) 
 
Se consideró conveniente prorrogar la Ley sobre medidas provisionales para facilitar la 
financiación de las PYME, etc. sólo hasta el 31 de marzo de 2013, y adoptar medidas 
concretas para apoyar la revitalización de las PYME, etc.  Pregunta: 
 
26. ¿Podría Japón proporcionar ejemplos de dichas medidas concretas? 
 RESPONSE:  To clarify, (a) the Government continu es to encourage financial institutions to 
respond to requests for changes of loan c onditions and financing facilitation, and (b) 
supervision and inspection of financial ins titutions is conducted in accordance with such 
stance and viewpoints. 
 
Página 24 (párrafo 84) 
 
Para asegurar la fiabilidad de los mercados: a) se fortaleció la respuesta a las ventas de 
acciones, etc. no cotizadas por agentes de instrumentos financieros no registrados; y b) se 
amplió el número de razones para denegar el re gistro de asesorías y agencias en materia de 
inversión.  Pregunta: 
 
27. ¿Podría Japón precisar cuáles nuevas razones se incluyeron para denegar el registro 
de asesorías y agencias en materia de inversión? WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 236 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  In order to further promote investor protection, the Financial Instruments and 
Exchange Act added personnel co mposition requirements as grounds for refusing registration 
of investment advisories and agencies (e.g. companies with executives unable to conduct 
business in an appropriate manner or those who have relations with anti-social forces are 
denied registration) 
 
Página 24 (párrafo 85) 
 
En marzo de 2012 se promul gó la Ley de modificación de la Ley de Seguros (…) la 
modificación de la Ley comprende: 1) medidas especiales de reglamentación de las 
actividades económicas de las empresas filiales; 2)  revisión de la reglamentación relativa a la 
transferencia de contratos de seguros; 3) estab lecimiento del sistema de reasignación de los 
servicios de seguros; 4) prórroga durante cinco años del plazo para la concesión de 
subvenciones oficiales a la Corporación de Prot ección de los Titulares de Pólizas de Seguros 
de Vida del Japón (…). 
 
Pregunta: 
 28. ¿Podría Japón indicar en qué consisten est as subvenciones oficiales y a qué monto 
ascienden?  
RESPONSE:  The subsidies to the Life Insurance Policyholder Protection Corporation of 
Japan (LIPPCJ) in the report mean that the G overnment may cover the whole or part of the 
costs of financial assistance which LIPPCJ has pr ovided to its members, if such costs are too 
great a burden for the LIPPCJ and its members alone to bear.  Página 25  (párrafo 91) 
 La JFTC ha reprimido severamente las infracciones de la Ley Antimonopolio. Hubo 20 procedimientos judiciales en relación con esas infracciones en 2010 y 15 en 2011. A continuación se 
presentan datos sobre esos casos. (Cuadro anexo)  
 Pregunta: 
29. ¿Cuáles han sido las áreas o sectores en los cuales la JFTC abrió estos 
procedimientos judiciales por infracciones a la Ley Antimonopolio? ¿De estas cuáles han 
concluido en sanciones? 
 
RESPONSE: The summary of the main cases in a year is described in the Annual Reports 
submitted to the OECD Competition Committee by JFTC. The reports are published on the 
JFTC’s website below. The further details of the individual cases are provided in the English press releases of JFTC. 
(Annual Reports) 
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/about_j ftc/annual_reports/index.html  
(Press releases of JFTC) 
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleases/index.html  
 
Página 26 (párrafo 98) 
 
Por lo que respecta al movimiento de personas físicas, en mayo de 2012 se adoptó una nueva medida de política sobre trato preferencial en  el procedimiento de inmigración para los 
profesionales extranjeros para promover la acept ación de extranjeros más cualificados, con el 
fin de contribuir al crecimiento económico y a la creación de nueva demanda y empleo en el 
Japón. Con esta medida se realiza una evaluación mediante la asignación de puntos en   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 237 
 
 
 aspectos tales como "logros académicos", "período de experiencia profesional", "sueldo 
anual" y "actividades de investigación". A lo s extranjeros con un determinado número de 
puntos se les reconoce como profesionales extranjeros muy cualificados y se les concede trato preferencial en el procedimiento de inmigración. 
Pregunta: 
 
30. ¿Podría Japón indicar en cuál fuente de información se pueden consultar los detalles 
sobre esta medida?  
RESPONSE : Please refer to the following URL for details: 
http://www.immi-moj.go.jp/newimmiact_3/en/index.html  
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 238 
 
 
 29. Dominican Republic 
 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW OF JAPAN: DOCUMENT WT/TPR/S/276 
questions from the Dominican Republic 
 
TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
AGRICULTURE  
 
Page 73, point (i), paragraph 2 
The end of paragraph 2 states that "In addition,  on 25 October 2011, a Basic Policy and Action 
Plan to Revitalize Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries was adopted". 
 
Could Japan please provide a detailed descriptio n of this Basic Action Plan? How much does 
the Plan cost? What political measures are applied? Is the Plan consistent with the obligations of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture? 
 
RESPONSE: 
In the plan, it is stated that the Government of Japan will work intensively over the next five 
years for the enhancement of the competitiven ess and soundness of Japan’s food, agriculture, 
forestry, and fisheries. For example,  
- enhancing competitiveness and soundness through promoting concentration of 
farmland and increasing the number of newcomers to agriculture 
- collaboration of primary, secondary, and te rtiary industries, transformation into 
growing industries 
- promoting the utilization of resources in rural areas for energy production 
For details, please refer the following website. 
http://www.npu.go.jp/policy/polic y05/pdf/20120815/ 20120815_en.pdf  
The budget related to this plan is approx.  1.2 trillion yen in FY2012 including existing 
programmes as well as programmes for forestry, fisheries and construction earthquake-resistant infrastructure. All the programmes are in accordance with the Agre ement on Agriculture. 
 
Page 73, paragraph 4. "The agriculture sector continues to receive substantial government support, comprising, 
inter alia,  a relatively higher average MFN applied ra te compared with other sectors; tariff 
quotas; income support; and, in some subsectors,  production controls. According to the OECD, 
"total support estimates" for agriculture for 2006-08 were comparable to 1.1% of GDP. Support 
is provided mainly through market price s upport; in addition, relatively high tariffs and 
production restrictions are in place, which lead to higher prices". 
 
Does this Japanese Government support not consti tute a violation of the WTO Agreement on 
Agriculture? Does Japan plan to reduce or eliminate this agricultural support?  
RESPONSE: Japan has been complying with the Agreement on Agriculture and has reduced its AMS to 14% 
of the level of concession.  
 
Border measures 
Page 75, paragraph 9. Japan operates 18 tariff quotas covering 175 tariff lines, mainly for dairy products and cereals 
(including rice), unchanged since 2011. The names of companies or persons that are a llocated quotas are posted  online by the MAFF; no 
information pertaining to quota amounts allocated to firms or individuals was available. 
In-quota imports of rice, wheat and barley, and certain milk products are handled mainly by 
state-trading entities; certain amounts of these products may be imported by private entities.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 239 
 
 
 Could Japan please describe the method used to  establish quota amounts and explain how the 
allocated volumes are consistent with those est ablished in the Agreement on Agriculture in 
respect of market access?  
RESPONSE: All the TRQs are operated in consistence with the WTO agreements and Japan’s tariff schedule. 
Almost all of the entire imports of the TRQ for rice, wheat, barley and a certain portion of dairy 
products are implemented by state-trading with  a view to stabilizing supply-demand for these 
products. The imports of all the other TRQs are for private importers.  Which quotas come under agreements with individual countries or regional groups? 
 RESPONSE: 
Under the RTAs which it has negotiated, Japan  has established tariff rate quotas on some 
agricultural products. For further information, please refer to the Regional Trade Agreements 
Information System (RTA-IS) on the WTO website where the tariff schedules of RTAs which 
Japan has negotiated are available, as well as factural presentation inby WTO secretariat 
documents which include information about tariff rate quotas for some of these RTAs. 
 
Why is there no  information pertaining to quota amounts allocated to firms or individuals? Is 
this not inconsistent with the WTO's transparency principle? 
 RESPONSE: 
The Government does not publish the size of quotas allocated to each company or individual as 
these allocations represent confidential inform ation for management, and persons who are 
granted allocations do not want su ch data to be published. Please refer to Article 1.11 of the 
Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures. 
 
Page 78, paragraph 14. 
The Government has programmes to promote exports of food and agricultural, forestry, and 
fishery products. It has targeted these to reach ¥1 trillion by 2020. The authorities state that this 
is to be achieved by: requesting importing countri es to set risk management measures regarding 
the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant acci dent; implementing strategic marketing under 
the "Japan Brand"; and increasing the appeal of Jap an's food culture to the rest of the world. 
 
Does Japan's programme to promot e exports of food and agricultural, forestry, and fishery 
products up until 2020 comply with the export subsidy requirements of the Agreement on 
Agriculture?  RESPONSE: 
Japan’s export promotion programmes do not include  any export subsidies. They are notified as 
marketing promotion under “general services” in our notification DS:1 and are operated 
consistently with the Agreement on Agriculture. 
 
Tourism policy  
 
The promotion of tourism in Japan is recent,  as Japanese legislation on this subject dates 
from 2007 and the creation of the Japan Tourism Agency from 2008. In 2011, demand for 
tourism fell due to the great East Japan eart hquake and tsunami and the Fukushima nuclear 
power plant disaster. The stated aims of th e Japanese Government's tourism policy are the 
promotion of both domestic and inbound tourism,  the enhancement of Japan's competitiveness 
as an international tourist destination,  and the promotion of vacation-taking. 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 240 
 
 
 The Dominican Republic wishes to express its concern regarding the tourism policy 
implemented by the Japanese authorities in response to the unfavourable tourism balance (outbound/inbound). In this light, we would like to know if this unfavourable balance is the 
result of a deliberate policy on the part of the to urism authorities, and if so, what the rationale of 
this policy is. 
 
RESPONSE: 
Japan does not conduct policies which lead to an unfavourable tourism balance 
(outbound/inbound). There is little possibility that  the problem which the Dominican Republic 
refers to is the result of a Japan Tourism Agency policy. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 241 
 
 
 30. ECUADOR 
QUESTIONS FROM ECUADOR 
 Informe de Gobierno 
 De conformidad con el Capítulo 2, Sección 1 “Pan orama general”, página 7, párrafo 8, se hace 
referencia a que el Japón ha adoptado diver sas medidas destinadas a seguir fomentando la 
liberalización del comercio internacional, en este sentido, ¿Podría Japón indicar cuáles son esas 
medidas que ha realizado para liberalizar el comercio internacional?  
 RESPONSE: 
Japan has taken various measures to further prom ote liberalization of international trade since 
the last TPR. Together with continuing efforts to advance the ongoing negotiations of the WTO, 
Japan has also made progress in the ongoing  Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) 
negotiations, and commenced or declared to commence 5 EPA/FTA nego tiations. At the same 
time, the government has advanced regulatory reform. The Subcommittee on Regulatory and 
Institutional Reform was established under the Government Revitalization Unit and conducted 
reviews of existing regulations and systems.  This Subcommittee compiled several reports 
recommending necessary reforms. Based on those re ports, relevant Cabinets have decided on 
more than 460 items to be reformed in total by December 2012.   Informe de la Secretaría de la OMC  RESUMEN  
Página ix, párrafo 18, respecto de la con tinuación de la transición de un sistema de 
sostenimiento de precios a un sistema de ayuda de los ingresos para el sector agrícola.  ¿Podría explicarnos Japón en qué consiste y qué requerimientos debe cumplir un agricultor que 
se adhiera a dicho proceso de transición?  
RESPONSE: 
Japan has introduced the direct payments to fa rmers in the hilly and mountainous areas and the 
payment to conserve and improve land, water a nd the environment and direct payment to crop 
farmers, while having abolishe d government procurement of rice for market price support in 
1998. The requirements for farmers differ from one direct payment to another. 
 
Página vii, párrafos 1 y 4, relativas al Capítulo  III, Sección 1 “Medidas que afectan directamente 
a las importaciones”, páginas 30 y 31, párrafos 12 y 13, respectivamente, todo lo cual está relacionado al incremento de los promedios de los equivalentes ad valorem  de los derechos no 
ad valorem  debido (como una de sus posibles causas) a la apreciación que ha presentado el yen 
frente a otras monedas como el dólar. ¿Podría indicarnos Japón qué medidas ha adoptad o para que los niveles arancelarios de los 
productos que tienen dere chos de importación no ad valorem  cumplan con los compromisos de 
Japón en materia de consolidaciones arancelarias?  
RESPONSE: 
Japan commits to tariff bindings including tho se by non-ad valorem duties. Therefore, no 
measure has been taken as indicated in the question. 
    
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 242 
 
 
 I. ENTORNO ECONÓMICO 
 
II. REGIMENES DE POLÍTICA COMERCIAL Y DE INVERSIONES 
 
2)  ACUERDOS Y ARREGLOS COMERCIALES 
 
Pág. 16, iii) “Sistema Generalizado de Preferenci as y otros arreglos preferenciales adoptados 
unilateralmente por el Japón”, en los párrafos 17, 18 y 19, se menciona que Japón en el año 
2011 suprimió todos los sistemas basados en niveles máximos; y además, excluyó de ese 
régimen numerosos productos agropecuarios e i ndustriales, especialmente de aquellos productos 
que pertenecen a partidas de exportación en l as que los países en desarrollo tienen ventaja 
comparativa. En este sentido, ¿nos gustaría cono cer en detalle cuáles son los productos y países 
que estarían afectados por la a dopción de la citada medida? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Information requested in the question is available at the following URL. 
http://www.customs.go.jp/english/c-answer_e/imtsukan/1506_e.htm 
 
III. POLÍTICAS Y PRÁCTICAS COMERCIALES, POR MEDIDAS 
 
1) MÉDIDAS QUE AFECTAN DIRECTAMENTE A LAS IMPORTACIONES 
 
Página 24, párrafo 4, se menciona que en vi rtud de los Acuerdos de  Reconocimiento Mutuo 
(ARM), la Administración de Aduanas del Ja pón, al efectuar su propia evaluación de los 
riesgos, tiene en cuenta la condición de lo s miembros de los programas de operadores 
económicos autorizados de otros países. 
¿Podría Japón brindar más información sobre la  implementación de estos acuerdos y los 
resultados de los mismos, particularmente a favor de los países en desarrollo?  
RESPONSE: 
A General effect of implementing MRA is that one Customs administration takes the status of AEOs in another Customs administration into acc ount and gives reduced risk score for cargoes 
that are imported/exported by them.  Therefore, it can be expected that the im plementation of the MRA between Japan and 
developing countries would bring same effect. 
 
However, please note that actual effect will be  decided bilaterally on the course of MRA 
discussion and not necessarily be the same as above.  ¿Podría Japón indicar de qué manera influye, en  las evaluaciones de riesgos, el hecho de que 
una determinada mercancía similar importada sea or iginaria de un país en desarrollo que sea 
signatario de un ARM ? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Japan Customs provides relaxed treatment such as reduced risk score for goods 
imported/exported by AEOs in partner countries. 
 
¿Podría Japón explicar cómo este “tratamiento” no podría convertirse en una ventaja comercial 
para ciertas mercancías pertenecientes a determinados países Miembros que hayan suscrito los ARM con Japón? 
 
 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 243 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  
Japan does not consider that implementing AEO MR with other countries does not become a 
commercial advantage.  
Página 25 y 31, párrafos 9 (nota al pie 5) y 13 ( nota al pie 11), respectivamente, en lo referente a 
la no disponibilidad de los EAV correspondientes de  las restantes líneas arancelarias a las que se 
aplican aranceles no ad valorem  debido a la falta de importaciones de un número no 
especificado de productos comprendidos en esa s líneas, o que algunos no son objeto de 
comercio internacional o que tienen muy poca dema nda de esos productos en particular, y a las 
tres categorías de aranceles de Japón: derechos est ablecidos por Ley, derechos consolidados en 
la OMC, y derechos preferenciales. Se expresa que en el caso de que el tipo de derechos temporales generales (establecidos por Ley) y los preferenciales sean superiores al consolidado de la OMC, se aplica este último a los Miembros de la Organización.  En virtud de lo expuesto, al no existir -como se indica- los EAV para un determinado número de 
productos por la falta de importaciones, de comercio internacional o de demanda, 
¿Podría explicarnos Japón cómo se asegura que los ar anceles que se perciben por estos bienes se 
enmarquen en los compromisos del país en  materia de consolidaciones arancelarias, 
especialmente para el caso en el que se apliquen a los Miembros de la OMC el arancel consolidado cuando los derechos temporales generales y preferenciales son mayores, si no 
existen los respectivos EAV ad valorem ? 
 
RESPONSE:  
As long as the bound rate is below the general tem porary rate or preferential rate, the bound rate 
applies to imported products. 
Whether the former is higher/lower than the latte r, including in the case where the former is ad 
valorem duty while the latter is non-ad valorem dut y, is determined in each import application, 
based on the value, volume and the exchange rate at the time of the application indicated in the 
application.  Página 35, párrafo 24, respecto de la determin ación del tamaño de los contingentes relacionados 
con la pesca. ¿Podría explicarnos Japón la razón de utilizar la variable de los precios del año 
anterior y las previsiones para el año sigui ente en la determinación del tamaño de los 
contingentes de la pesca que se beneficiarían de una renta contingenciaría; particularmente si 
para determinar los tamaños de contingentes ex isten otras variables adicionales, que podrían 
considerarse como más apropiadas, como son la situación de la oferta y demanda interna, 
volumen de importaciones y la producción y consumo interno? 
 
RESPONSE:  
As the Secretariat’s report men tions, fish-related import quotas ar e allocated based on, not only 
prices, but also domestic supply and demand, and the amount of imports.  
¿Adicionalmente, existe algún documento que preci se cómo influye la variable de precios del 
año anterior y las previsiones para el año siguiente en la determinación del tamaño del 
contingente?  
RESPONSE:  
The statistics the Government of Japan uses to determine the size of the quotas is available to 
the public.  Página 36, párrafo 27, referente a los producto s objeto de comercio de Estado por parte de 
Japón; en el caso del tabaco en rama. Se e xplica que los objetivos fundamentales de las 
actividades de comercio de Estado son estabilizar  la oferta y los precios de esos productos 
básicos y proteger los intereses de los consumidores. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 244 
 
 
 En el caso de la diferencia de precios entre el tabaco en rama de producción nacional y el 
Importado, ¿podría indicarnos Japón como, para este caso en específico, se cumple con uno de los objetivos fundamentales del comercio de Estado de proteger los intereses de los 
consumidores (incluidas a la empresas que utilizan  el tabaco en rama como materia prima)? 
 
RESPONSE:  
Concerning importing of leaf tobacco, JT imports  leaf tobacco on the basis of commercial 
consideration, taking into account the supply and demand status of manufactured tobacco, as 
well as quality, market price and other relevant characteristics of leaf tobacco. As Japan does 
not impose any restrictions on the importing of leaf tobacco, the interests of consumers have 
been ensured in this respect.  Dada la protección arancelaria que recibe este sector (página 26, párrafo 9, nota al pie 6), parecería existir una transferencia de recursos del consumidor al productor nacional, en ese 
sentido, ¿podría explicarnos Japón cómo esta medi da se ajusta a los compromisos del país en 
materia de subvenciones agrícolas? 
 
RESPONSE:  
As Japan’s tariff rate on leaf tobacco is zero,  this sector does not receive any protection from 
this standpoint. 
 
Página 45, párrafo 52, se menciona que en virt ud a la Ley de Normas Agrícolas del Japón, las 
entidades extranjeras que certifican a las empr esas que producen, elaboran y/o distribuyen 
productos agrícolas o forestales en conformidad con las normas agrícolas del Japón puede ser acreditadas como organismos de certificación extranjeros registrados. 
¿Podría Japón indicar cuáles son los requisitos y circunstancias que una empresa extranjera de 
un país en desarrollo que produce, elabora y/o distribuye productos agrícolas o forestales debe cumplir para ser acreditada como organismo de certificación extranjero registrado?  
RESPONSE:  
In order to be accredited as a Registered Ov erseas Certifying Body, an overseas entity shall 
meet the criteria for the accreditation prescribed in the JAS Law. In particular, it is stipulated in 
the criteria that an entity shall be a legal en tity in conformity with the ISO/IEC17065. The 
information regarding the application for the accreditation as a Registered Overseas Certifying 
Body is available on the following MAFF website. http://www.maff.go.jp/e/jas/specific/criteria_o.html  
 
Pág. 45, párrafo 54. En “Asimismo, se estab lecieron nuevas normas sobre seguridad de los 
productos" Por favor, explicar porque se estab lecieron estas nuevas normas, y en que se está 
poniendo mayor énfasis.  
RESPONSE:  
In order for the suppliers to apply the latest t echnical regulations, Japan revised the "Ministerial 
Ordinance of Technical Requirements for Gas E quipment and Appliances," and the "Ministerial 
Ordinance of Technical Requirements for LPG Equipment and Appliances."  The old Japan Industrial Standards (hereinafter re ferred to as "JIS") which are referred to in 
technical regulations are replaced with the latest JIS. 
 
In relation to what´s stated in pages 46-47, pa ragraphs 60 and 61, Article 11.3 of Japan’s Food 
Sanitation Law (Law No. 233, December 24, 1947), provides:  
 “…Food in which substances that are the ing redients of agricultural chemicals […] remain in 
a quantity exceeding the quantity that the Minister  of Health, Labour and Welfare specifies as 
having no risk to human health by hearing th e opinions of the Pharmaceutical Affairs and Food   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 245 
 
 
 Sanitation Council shall not be pr oduced, imported, processed, used, cooked, preserved, or sold 
for the purpose of marketing…” 
 
This provision appears to have been implem ented through Notification No. 497 of the Japanese 
Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, where a 0.01 ppm is established for products such as 
2-4D and many other pesticides.  Could Japan explain the existing rationale behind the MRLs applied to 2-4D in cocoa beans? 
 RESPONSE:  
When Japan introduced the Positive List System  in 2006 there was no Codex MRL set for 2,4-D 
in cacao, and major countries (the United States,  the European Union, Australia, Canada and 
New Zealand) did not have national MRLs for 2, 4-D in cacao. In addition, no request was made 
by domestic and foreign industries to set an MRL for 2,4-D in cacao. As a result, a uniform 
limit (0.01 ppm) has been applied. 
 
The uniform limit was established as the amount unlikely to cause damage to human health, 
based on the acceptable exposure level evalua ted by JECFA (Joint FAO/WHO Expert 
Committee on Food Additives) and the United States Food and Drug Administration.  This level is the same as the European Union unifo rm limit. Before establishment of the uniform 
limit, Japan notified the WTO members in accordance with the SPS Agreement, and 
understands that there were no procedural pr oblems in establishing the uniform limit. 
 Could Japan explain the reasons why MRLs of 2-4D significantly higher are accepted for other products different for cocoa beans? 
 
RESPONSE:  
When Japan introduced the positive list system, Jap an set the MRLs for 2,4-D on the basis of 
the MRLs of Codex, U.S.A, EU, Au stralia, Canada and New Zealand. 
No MRLs were set at Codex or in these count ries and no request was made by domestic and 
foreign industries to set the MRL for 2,4-D in cacao. As a result, the uniform limit (0.01 ppm) is 
applied. 
 Could Japan provide copies of any and all the ri sk assessments that led to the adoption of the 
MRLs of 0.01 ppm for 2,4-D based on a “positive list” basis, as well as  any risk assessments 
that served as a basis for the adoption of MR Ls other products, such as water and broccoli? 
 
RESPONSE:  
When Japan introduced the positive list system, Jap an set the MRLs for 2,4-D on the basis of 
the MRLs of Codex, U.S.A, EU, Au stralia, Canada and New Zealand. 
The MRL of Mineral water established based on the WHO standards for drinking water, broccoli was set referencing standards in the United States and The Europe Union. Each MRL 
in Japan applies a uniform limit (0.01 ppm). 
 The uniform limit was established as an amount unlik ely to damage human health, based on the 
concept of “acceptable exposure” that has been scientifically assessed by JECFA and the U.S. 
Food and Drug Administration. 
 
The risk assessment of 2,4-D h as been conducted by the FSC but the result is not known yet. 
 Could Japan explain how this measure is compa tible with article 1.1 of the SPS Agreement, 
which stipulates that SPS measures "must be de veloped and applied in accordance with the 
provisions of [the SPS] Agreement"? 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 246 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  
Japan has established MRLs for commodities in accordance with the WTO/SPS Agreement. 
Before establishing the uniform limit and the provisional MRLs in 2,4-D when Japan introduced the positive list system, Japan notified WTO Me mbers in accordance with the SPS Agreement 
(G/SPS/N/JPN/145). Therefore, Japan understands that there were no procedural problems in 
the establishment of these standards.  Could Japan explain how the measure is co mpatible with the commitments of the SPS 
agreement such as to: 
•   be based on scientific evidence (Articles 2.2, 5.1, 5.2, 5.7); 
•   not be more trade-restricted than necessary (Articles 2.2, 5.6); 
•   be non-discriminatory (Article 2.3); and •   reflect a consistent application of a Member 's appropriate level of protection (Article 5.5)? 
 
RESPONSE:  
Japan set the MRLs on the basis of the MRLs of Codex, U.S.A, EU, Australia, Canada and New 
Zealand when the Positive List System was introduced. When there were no such MRLs to which to be referred and no requests by domestic and 
foreign industries to set MRLs, Japan applied the uniform limit which was established as the 
amount unlikely to cause damages to human h ealth, based on the acceptable exposure level 
evaluated by JECFA (Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives) and the United 
States Food and Drug Administration.  On its response to the concern raised by Ec uador at the SPS Committee held on 20-21 October 
2011, Japan stated that it adopted Codex MRLs as Japanese MRLs where the necessary 
requirements were met.  
 Could Japan explain: (i)  What are the necessary requirements that must  be met in order to adopt Codex MRLs? and, 
(ii)  How it established the MRLs on produc ts where there is no Codex standard? 
 RESPONSE:  
When establishing or amending a MRL for each commodity, the MHLW has been harmonizing 
with the Codex MRLs whenever possible.   When there is no Codex MRL, the MHLW establis hes the MRL on the basis of residue data in 
light of the results of FSC’s risk assessment. 
 
Japan has also suggested that fo r setting those MRLs it relied at least in part on the work of 
JECFA and the U.S. FDA.   Could Japan identify and explain: (i)  all documents prepared by JECFA, U.S. FDA, or other scientific bodies, on which it relied 
in order to adopt its standards for 2,4-D. 
 
RESPONSE:  
Current provisional MRLs for 2,4-D have been se t on the basis of the MRLs of Codex, U.S.A, 
EU, Australia, Canada and New Zealand. FSC  has been conducting the risk assessment for 
2,4-D. 
 Pág. 47, párrafo 62. Por favor indicar a qué tipo de sustancia se hace mención “negro de huesos”.  
 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 247 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  
As notified in the SPS Notification (G/SPS/N/JP N/277, 9 June 2011), the import suspension of 
bone charcoal for water purification from forei gn countries has been lifted, except from those 
that experienced the occurrence of BSE, on co ndition that the competent authority of an 
exporting country issues certificates to ensure  that the following requirements are met:  
(a) the exporting country has been free from BSE  (b) bones used for the imported product originate in the exporting country  (c) bones used for the imported product are derived from healthy animals  (d) bones used for the imported product are produced  in such a way as to prevent contamination 
by specified risk materials (heads (except for tongues and cheek meat ), spinal cords, distal ileum 
(limited to a two meter portion from its juncti on with the cecum) and the vertebral column 
(including dorsal root ganglia) from cattle of all ages)  (e) bones for the imported product are subjected to  carbonizing treatment at the temperature of 
700-800 degrees Celsius for more than 8 hours  
Pág. 48, párrafo 66. En la línea 3 dice: “¼en el momento de su importación al Japón son 
inspeccionados por una organización inspectora ofic ial en el país exportador...” ¿Japón tiene un 
listado de las organizaciones inspectoras oficiales de cada país que son reconocidos por ellos? , 
¿dónde podemos acceder a esa información?  RESPONSE:  
The list of official foreign laboratories is publis hed on the website of the Ministry of Health, 
Labour and Welfare. Please refer to the following URL: http://www.mhlw.go.jp/t opics/yunyu/5/index.html  
 
Pág. 48, párrafo 66. En la línea 5 dice “¼Lo s organismos de inspección deben registrarse 
oficialmente en el Japón por conducto del gobier no del país exportador¼” la pregunta es: ¿En 
qué institución del Japón deben ser registrados los organismos de inspección y cuál es el 
proceso para su registro? 
 
RESPONSE: 
For the registration of laboratories with an alytical capabilities that are internationally 
recognized, please contact the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  
3) MEDIDAS QUE AFECTAN A LA PRODUCCIÓN Y AL COMERCIO 
 
Páginas 65 y 66, párrafos 131 y 134, respectivamen te, sobre la iniciativa de la OMPI (con la 
estrecha colaboración de JIPA), para promover y cooperar en el desarrollo, aplicación y difusión 
de tecnologías racionales desde el punto de vista ecológico.  Dado que el objetivo de WIPO Green era proporcionar tanto a los usuarios co mo a los proveedores de tecnologías ecológicas 
una plataforma para acelerar la adaptación, adopción y uso de las tecnologías ecológicas, 
particularmente en los países en desarrollo y las economías emergentes, y en virtud de que 
Japón es uno de tres los primeros países por el número de patentes relacionadas con las tecnologías ambientales presentadas en el marco de l PCT, ¿podría explicarnos cómo se pretende 
conseguir los objetivos descritos supra, princi palmente, cuando la tecnología ecológica está 
sujeta a derechos de propiedad intelectual derivados del establecimiento de invención? 
 
RESPONSE: 
Japan understands that, as described in Paragraph 134 of the report by the WTO Secretariat, the 
WIPO established the “WIPO Green” project as one of the WIPO measures based on the GTPP 
concept proposed by the JIPA, a non-profit a nd non-governmental organization. Japan also 
understands that the JIPA has been cooperating with the WIPO in launching the project. (Japan 
understands that, in other words, the GTPP has been taken over by the “WIPO Green”.) WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 248 
 
 
 In addition, Japan understands that the WIPO has already launched the “WIPO Green” on a trial 
basis. For further details, please refer to the WI PO website etc. As to your questions, please 
refer to the WIPO Green related materials (as below, for example).  
WIPO MAGAZINE WIPO GREEN: Facilitating Dissemination of Green Technology 
http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/wi po_magazine/en/pdf/2012/wipo_pub_121_2012_03.p
df 
 
Pág. 72, párrafo 153 ¿Cuáles son los sectores basa dos en derechos de autor a los que se hace 
referencia? 
 
RESPONSE: 
As shown in the Copyright White Paper, core copyright industries are as follows; Printing and 
Publishing, Computer Software, Broadcasting,  Transmission, Advertising, Music, Motion 
Picture, Photography, Legitimate Theater, Game  Software, Entertainment Facilities, Design, 
Architecture, Libraries and Museum, Authors and Artists. 
 Pág. 76, párrafo 172. Mediante que  parámetros se decide la adh esión al Tratado Internacional de 
Propiedad Intelectual o particip ar en un determinado comité? 
 RESPONSE:  
In general, the Government of Japan takes the opinions of domestic stakeholders into 
consideration and goes through necessary intern al procedures when it decides to conclude 
WIPO treaties.  However, procedures can vary depending on the circumstances.  
Regarding WIPO committees, Japan has been activ ely participating in various committees and 
will continue to do so since it considers WIPO  activities to be important in promoting IPR 
protection.  
IV. POLÍTICAS COMERCIALES, POR SECTORES 
 
1). AGRICULTURA 
 
Pág. 82, párrafo 4 y 5, se hace re ferencia a la ayuda estatal en el sector agrícola en forma de 
sostenimiento de los precios de mercado, sin embargo, los precios al consumidor de los 
productos agrícolas en el Japón siguen estando muy por encima del promedio de la OCDE, 
¿Podría Japón explicar qué medidas está llevando a ca bo a fin de contrarrestar estos efectos y no 
perjudicar al consumidor nacional?  
RESPONSE:  
Japan has been promoting agricultural reform in cluding abolishing market price support for rice 
in 1998 and, for example, the consumer price of  rice has fallen by more than 20% in nominal 
terms compared to 1990’s. Stable food supply to domestic consumers is ensured through an 
appropriate combination of domestic  production, imports and reserve.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 249 
 
 
 31. ECUADOR-2 
Undécimo Examen de las Políticas Comerciales de Japón 
 19 y 21 de febrero de 2013 
Preguntas adicionales planteadas por el Ecuador  
 
Informe de la Secretaría de la OMC  
V. ENTORNO ECONÓMICO 
 
Párrafo 20, página 9. ¿Podría el Japón ampliar la  información sobre el contenido de los acuerdos 
de asociación económica? ¿El Japón tendría inte rés en revisar la pos ibilidad de negociar un 
acuerdo de este tipo con los bl oques regionales en Suramérica? 
 
RESPONSE:  For further information on the content of  the EPAs, please refer to the factual 
presentations of the CRTA regarding respective EPAs. Japan will actively engage in EPA/FTA 
negotiations with selected countries of strategic importance to Japan.  
 
VI. REGIMENES DE POLÍTICA COMERCIAL Y DE INVERSIONES 
 
2)  ACUERDOS Y ARREGLOS COMERCIALES 
 Párrafo 51, página 17. ¿Cuál es el alcance de los acuerdos de inversi ón que el Japon promueve? 
¿Cuál sería la diferencia de los acuerdos de inve rsión vs el contenido sobre inversiones en los 
acuerdos de asociación que el Ja pón ha concertado con 10 países? 
 
RESPONSE:  The main scope of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) that the Government of 
Japan promotes generally includes the following: -National treatment (pre- and post-estab lishment phase or post-establish phase only) 
-Most favored nation treatment (pre- and post- establishment phase or post-establish phase only) 
-Prohibition of performance requirement -General treatment (fair and equitable treatment, umbrella clause, etc) 
-Access to the courts of justice 
-Expropriation and compensation -Protection from strife -Free transfers -Subrogation 
-Dispute settlement mechanism (SSDS and ISDS) 
-Taxation -Intellectual property rights -Joint committee Investment chapters in the EPAs that Japan has concluded generally incl ude similar elements as 
listed above.  
3)  REGIMEN DE INVERSIONES EXTRANJERAS 
 
Párrafo 83, página 23. ¿Podría el Japón comentar sobre los beneficios o resultados que ha traído 
la aplicación de la Ley de medidas provisionales para facilitar la financiación de las pequeñas y 
medianas empresas (PYME) y qué otros agentes económicoa se han beneficiado de esta 
regulación? 
 
RESPONSE:  The implementation of the Act on Temporary Measures to Facilitate Financing 
for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises, et c. promotes facilitation of SMEs business by 
revising the loan terms (rescheduling, refinanc ing and reduction of interest payments) offered 
by financial institutions to SMEs. With regard to  the revision of the loan terms, there were 4 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 250 
 
 
 million applications, and 3.7 million cases were  approved among them. (as of the end of 
September, 2012) The rate of implementation exceeds 90 percent.  Further, this Act aims to facilitate financing fo r residential mortgage borrowers in addition to 
SMEs.  
 
VII. POLÍTICAS Y PRÁCTICAS COMERCIALES, POR MEDIDAS 
 
4) MEDIDAS QUE AFECTAN A LA PRODUCCIÓN Y AL COMERCIO 
 
En el Informe de la Secretaría de la Organizaci ón Mundial de Comercio páginas 2 a 4 y 55 a 58, 
se explica que el Japón ha sufrido una disminuc ión de los ingresos fiscales aumentando su 
deuda pública, por lo que han realizado reformas tributarias que incluye medidas para ampliar 
su base fiscal así como incenti vos fiscales enfocados al fomento de la inversión en cuestiones 
ambientales o actividades de investigación y desarrollo. 
 
De acuerdo con el punto ii) del literal a) del numeral 1) del párrafo 1.1 del artículo 1 del 
Acuerdo sobre Subvenciones y Medidas Comp ensatorias de la Organización Mundial de 
Comercio (Anexo 1A del Protocolo de Adh esión a la Organización Mundial de Comercio, 
publicado en el Suplemento del Registro Oficia l No. 977, de fecha 28 de junio de 1996), se 
considerará que existe una subve nción cuando haya una contribución financiera de un gobierno 
o de cualquier organismo público en el territori o de un Miembro, en caso de que se condonen o 
no se recauden ingresos públicos que en condiciones normales se percibirían. 
 El literal a) del artículo 5 del Acuerdo en me nción, establece que ningún Miembro deberá 
causar, mediante el empleo de cualquiera de l as subvenciones a que se refieren los párrafos 1 y 
2 del artículo 1, efectos desfavorables para los intereses de otros Miembros, en referencia a la 
rama de producción nacional de otro Miembro.  Con fundamento en lo señalado y con el afán de  conocer sobre la naturaleza de los incentivos 
tributarios establecidos por Japón, se sugi ere realizar las siguientes preguntas: 
 
a. Los incentivos fiscales que Japón aplicaría, ¿son de carácter general o están enfocados 
específicamente a un grupo de empresas o a un sec tor productivo? En este último caso, ¿qué 
grupos de empresas o sectores productivos son aquellos? 
 
RESPONSE:  They are intended for corporations w ho meet the requireme nts of the law, 
therefore they are not targeted specifically to a group of companies or productive sector.  
 b. ¿Los incentivos fiscales a los que se refiere la pregunta anterior son de carácter temporal o permanente?  
RESPONSE:  Some of them have established peri od of applications and others do not.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 251 
 
 
 32.Indonesia 
INDONESIA'S QUESTIONS 
 
I. Services 
 
Distribution Services  (Page.107, Para 99 (S276-5))  
“Several major foreign distributors are presen t in Japan (e.g. Wal-Mart, Metro, H and 
M). There are no economic needs tests for the establishment of supermarkets, but there is zoning legislation at both national and local levels. Foreign distributors have, in 
certain instances, complained that the implem entation of those local regulations was not 
always consistent and transparent towards fo reign distributors, an allegation denied by 
the Japanese authorities”  
Question:  
1. With regards to Japan’s zoning legislation, please provide further particulars 
including its full title and citation and an explanation of its main elements. 
 
RESPONSE: The relevant laws are City Planning Act (Articles 8, 9, 15) and Building 
Standard Law (Article 48 and Table 2). Zoning regulation restricts the use of a building, FAR (Floor Area Ratio), building height, etc. 
by land use zoning. It is aimed to promote efficiency of civic function and to form a positive 
city environment by means of appropriate zoning for housing, co mmerce, industry, etc. from the 
viewpoint of the future of the city. 
 
2. With respect to the implementation of the above regulation, please explain the 
implementation procedures at both na tional and local levels and provide 
examples of the kind of complaints that are often received from Foreign Service suppliers.  
 
RESPONSE: Buildings are constructed  through the procedure by local governments to ensure 
that zoning regulation is observed. Regarding comp laints, there is nothing in particular to point 
out. 
 
Movement of natural person (Page.24 , Para 98 (S276)) 
 “Regarding the movement of natural pe rsons, a new policy measure on preferential 
treatment in the immigration procedure for foreign professionals was introduced in May 
2012 for the purpose of promoting the acceptan ce more highly skilled foreign nationals, 
with the aim of helping to contribute to economic growth, creation of new demand and 
employment in Japan. Through this measure,  evaluation is made by assigning points to 
such items as “educational attainment”, “period of professional experience”, “annual 
salary” and “research performance”. Foreign na tionals with a certain number of points 
are recognized as “highly skilled foreign professionals” and are given preferential 
treatment in the immigration procedure” 
 
Question: 
3. Please provide further explanation about the new policy measure on 
preferential treatment in particular explaining the full nature of the 
preferential treatment accorded to these highly skilled providers.  
 
RESPONSE:  Please refer to the following URL for details.  
http://www.immi-moj.go.jp/newimmiact_3/en/index.html 
 
4. Please provide the most recent statistics on the number of foreign nationals 
granted entry under this preferential scheme WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 252 
 
 
 RESPONSE:  The statistics regarding points-based pr eferential treatment for highly skilled 
foreign professionals in immigration procedur e is still being processed, thus has yet to be 
published.  
 
5. Regarding MNP under Japan bilateral FTA, please provide explanation about 
National Treatment discrimination be tween foreign services suppliers and 
Japan services suppliers  
RESPONSE: The new policy measure on preferential tr eatment in the immigration procedure 
for foreign professionals is not covered in the commitments of MNP in FTA/EPA. 
Under the measure, only foreign services suppliers (natural persons) will be given preferential 
treatment in the immigration procedure of Japan. 
 
II. Agriculture 
The Maximum Residues Limits (MRLs) polic y implementation by the Government of 
Japan's was based on the amendment Food San itation in May 2003 by which time three 
(3) years have issued positive list system for a variety of chemicals used in agricultural 
products (domestic and importe d). On May 26, 2006 positive list system for MRLs are 
fully enforced by the Government of Japan under the authority of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) in partic ular Directorate General of Food Safety 
and Consumer Affairs and has been notified to the WTO. 
 Recent developments  in 2010, exports of  Indonesian coffee beans to Japan were 
denied due to the discovery of chemi cal residues carbaryl on coffee beans from 
Indonesia by the MHLW of Japan that exceed the threshold standard in Japan of 0.01 
ppm. It is the impact of policy implementati on MRLs in particular the use of chemical 
pesticides carbaryl. Carbaryl pesticide typically  used to control black ants in the coffee 
harvest, because ants are consid ered annoying coffee harvesters. 
 In response to these obstacles, the Ministry of Agriculture through the Directorate General of Plantations had been monitori ng and testing of the coffee beans in 3 
provinces of coffee production centers in Lampung, South Sumatra and Bengkulu. Tests 
conducted in the laboratory and Certification Quality Testing Center of Agricultural and 
Forest and stated that the coffee samples were not detected carbaryl residue content.  The Minister of Agriculture has sent a lette r to the Chairman of the All Japan Coffee 
Association in 2010 related to the results of  sample testing conducted by Indonesia.  
 
Question: 
6.  Indonesia seeks clarification of the background of parameter for determining 
carbaryl residues of 0.01 ppm by the Japanese government. The Codex Alimentarius does not have any threshold carbaryl residues in coffee beans. 
 
RESPONSE: When Japan introduced th e Positive List System in 2006, there was no Codex 
MRL set for carbaryl in Coffee beans, and majo r countries (the United States, the European 
Union, Australia, Canada and New Zealand) did not have national MRLs for carbaryl in coffee 
beans.  In addition, no request was made by domestic and foreign industries to set an MRL for 
carbaryl in coffee beans. As a result, a uni form limit (0.01 ppm) has been applied. 
 The uniform limit was established as the amount unlikely to cause damage to human health, 
based on the acceptable exposure level evalua ted by the JECFA (Joint FAO/WHO Expert 
Committee on Food Additives) and the United States Food and Drug Administration. This level 
is the same as the European Union uniform lim it. Before establishment of the uniform limit,   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 253 
 
 
 Japan notified the WTO members in accordance with the SPS Agre ement, and understands that 
there were no procedural problems in establishing the uniform limit.  
7. Indonesia called for the Japanese government to set standards by considering the 
MRL's carbaryl standards used by the Eu ropean Union at 0.1 ppm and the United 
States at 0.3 ppm. 
 RESPONSE:  Japan recognizes that the European Union has set an MRL of 0.1 ppm for coffee 
beans after Japan introduced the positive list system. Japan, however, understands that the 
United States does not have any MRL for this cr op. Please confirm that in fact the US MRL is 
0.3 ppm.  Japan establishes MRLs based on scientific evalua tion of information provided at the time of 
registration of the agricultural chemicals (such as crops to which the target compound applies, 
how to use, proposed MRLs, etc.) and residue trial data obtained under proper use. If Indonesia 
wishes Japan to establish an MRL for coffee bean s, Japan recommends that Indonesia file an 
application with the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan (MHLW) along with data 
supporting the limit Indonesia wants. For th e application procedure, please refer:  
http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/foodsafety/residue/index.html 
If there are any questions, please contact us (Standard and Evaluation Division, Department of 
Food Safety, MHLW) through the Indonesian Embassy in Tokyo.  
 
III. Others 
According to one of Indonesia's state ow ned companies, there is Japan Article 
Management Promotion (JAMP) consorcium built in Japan. JAMP is established by 
companies and association in Japan in order to  manage the safety of chemical content or 
products exported to Japan. JAMP was firstly known in 2005.  
Question: 
8. Has JAMP already been implemented into an  official regulation by the authorized 
government? Or JAMP is still a rumor estab lished by stakeholders but has not been 
acknowledged by the government? 
9. If JAMP has been impelemented in a regula tion, we would like to ask what kind of 
policy or regulation accomodated from JAMP? 
 RESPONSE:   JAMP is not regulated by the government. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 254 
 
 
 RESPONSES TO FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS 
 
1 CHINA 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW OF JAPAN  
FOLLOW-UP WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM CHINA 
PART I: QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SECRETARIAT REPORT 
II. TRADE AND INVESTMENT REGIME  
(3) FOREIGN INVESTMENT REGIME 
 
Page 19(Para 34) 
There have been no changes to laws, regula tions, and rules concerning inward FDI since 
2010. …. These include:  agriculture, forestry a nd fisheries, crude oil, leather and leather 
products, and air and maritime transport.  Approval is also required in some other sectors on 
the grounds of public order, public safety, an d national security.  The authorities state that 
only one request for approval has been denied.  Besides the approval (prior notification) requirements under the Foreign Exchange and Fore ign Trade Act, various other laws stipulate 
specific restrictions on inward FDI in certain  sectors, including the acquisition of land, 
mining, oil industry, telecommunications, and transport. 
 
Questions: 
Is there any plan to amend laws and regulations  concerning inward FDI? Is there any plan to 
cancel or relax approval procedures or restrictions on investments in the above mentioned sectors? 
 
RESPONSE: At this point, there are no plans to amend laws and regulations for relaxing 
restrictions on inward FDI in the said sectors.  
Page 20(Para 39) 
As mentioned, in December 2011 Japan launc hed the "Program for Promoting Japan as an 
Asian Business Center and Direct Investment into Japan". The Programme's five central 
initiatives are: • to boost profitability to promote investment, which would include measures such as the Asian Business Promotion Project;  
• to utilize the special zone system to  attract investment. Measures under this 
initiative would include the Special Zone for Reconstruction and the Comprehensive Special 
Zone System, where firms would be exempt from regulations and be provided fiscal and 
financial incentives;  
• to improve the investment environment a nd create structure for investment support; 
• to make the living environment more comfortable at investment sites; and the initiative to enrich the dissemination of information welcoming investment.  
Questions: 
How many special zones have been established in Japan? Where are they? What procedures 
shall foreign companies follow and whether foreign companies shall obtain governmental 
approvals to establish enterprises in special zones? Please specify the details of “being 
exempt from regulations” and “being provided fiscal and financial incentives”.  RESPONSE:  As to the Special Zone for Reconstruc tion, 227 municipalities are eligible to 
seek approval from the Government by specifyi ng to which areas they would like to see the   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 255 
 
 
 special measures applied. 52 plans in total have  been approved by the Government thus far 
under the system. For details, please refer to the following website:  (http://www.reconstruction.go.jp/english/2013 0308_CurrentStatus_PathToward_FINAL.pdf  ) 
The website above includes: 
1. a map illustrating the location of the munici palities whose plans have been approved for 
tax breaks and other special measures (page 19); 
2. details of deregulation and simplified procedures as well as other special measures such 
as tax breaks and fiscal/financial  incentives (page 40~42); and 
3. an exhaustive list of approved plans (page 43~49). 
 Under the system of Special Zones for Reconstruction, it is the municipalities, not the respective companies including foreign ones, that are required to seek approval from the 
Government.  
Companies, both Japanese and foreign alike, ar e subject to the minimum procedures needed 
for the special measures to take effect.  As to the Comprehensive Special Zones (CSZs),  44 regions have been selected: 7 regions as 
CSZs for International Competitiveness Deve lopment and 37 regions as CSZs for Local 
Revitalization. Please refer to the attached map of the CSZs. A company is required to join 
the CSZ project in which it plans to conduct business in order to be exempted from regulations and to be provided fiscal and fi nancial incentives. If necessary, those who are 
willing to participate in a project can ask for details from the local government that conducts 
the CSZ project. A foreign company is not requir ed to obtain government approval for merely 
conducting business in a CSZ. Aside from th e usual requirements and procedures for a 
foreign company to establish an enterprise in  Japan, there are no additional requirements and 
procedures for establishing an enterprise in a C SZ. Under the CSZ system, the Government of 
Japan allows regulatory exceptions (for exampl e, those from the Building Standards Act or 
the Factory Location Act), as well as tax, fiscal and financial support in order to assist pioneering efforts that will help overcome local  issues and lead to economic revitalization. 
Please refer to the attached material for the contents of special measures provided under the 
CSZ system.  III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
(1) MEASURES DIRECTLY AFFECTING IMPORTS 
(v) State trading 
Page 32(Para 27) 
 
State-trading activities in Japan involve leaf t obacco, opium, rice, wheat and barley, and milk 
products.….  In 2011, the average price of do mestically produced leaf tobacco was ¥1,865 
per kg, more than three times the average pr ice of imported leaf tobacco (¥542 per kg). 
 Questions: 
Please specify in detail the administration syst em of state-trading activities. Whether the 
government intervenes in operation of state- trading enterprises? How can state-trading 
enterprises guarantee fair treatment on sources of imported products? 
 
RESPONSE:  Almost the entire volume of rice, wheat, barley and a certain portion of dairy 
products are imported through state trading, while  the imports of all the other TRQs are for 
private importers.   
Regarding the state trading of rice, wheat and barley, MAFF itself imports those products.  
ALIC, a state trading enterprise, imports desi gnated dairy products and sells them to the WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 256 
 
 
 domestic market, and also decides which products  are needed to be imported considering the 
domestic supply-demand situation.  Concerning the importing of leaf tobacco, JT imports leaf tobacco on the basis of commercial 
consideration, taking into account  supply and demand situations of manufactured tobacco, as 
well as quality, market price and other relevant characteristics of leaf tobacco. As Japan does not impose any restrictions on importing of leaf tobacco, fair treatment on sources of imported products has been ensured from this standpoint.  
All products imported by state trading are purch ased and sold in accordance with commercial 
consideration in GATT article XVII 1(b).  For the details, please refer to the following websites. Rice, Wheat and Barley: http://www.maff.go. jp/j/seisan/boueki/nyusatu/index.html 
Designated dairy products: http://www.alic.go.jp/operation/livestock/dairy-import.html  
 
(i) Export promotion schemes 
Page48(Para94) 
 The Japan Bank for International Cooperati on (JBIC), and Nippon Export and Investment 
Insurance (NEXI) administer medium- and long-term export credits….. 
 
Questions: 
1. Please specify the income and the benef its payment of NEXI in 2010 and 2012. 
 
RESPONSE:  The income of NEXI in FY2010 was 39.8 billion. The amount of income for 
FY2012 has not been confirmed.  2. Does NEXI underwrite overseas sale or service business of Japanese-invested global enterprises? If yes, how does it underwrite such business? 
 
RESPONSE:  NEXI is promoting reinsurance agreem ents with export credit agencies (ECAs) 
to support domestic and overseas trans actions of overseas Japanese subsidiaries. 
And, NEXI promotes fronting services (arrangements in which a local insurer’s primary insurance contact is 100% backed by NEXI ’s reinsurance) through Japanese insurance 
companies abroad. In doing so, NEXI suppor ts overseas Japanese subsidiaries by providing 
them the same level of service available in Japan. 
 3. What is the industry preference in Japan’ s export credits business, including the industries 
gaining pivotal supports? Please summarize the future development of Japan’s export credits business.  
RESPONSE:  The Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) provides export loans to 
support the export of machineries, equipment and technologies as stipulated in the JBIC Act.  
Nippon Export and Investment Insurance (NEX I) provides trade insurance that protects 
companies from risks arising from overseas tr ansactions as stipulated in the Trade and 
Investment Insurance Act. 
 
There are no industries in Japan that gain pivotal support through official export credits. Furthermore, the financial terms and conditions  of the official export credits provided by 
JBIC and NEXI are in conformity with th e OECD Arrangement for Officially Supported 
Export Credit. 
 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 257 
 
 
 (3) MEASURES AFFECTING PRODUCTION AND TRADE  
(iv) Intellectual property rights  
Page 54(Para 118) 
 
The National IP Strategic Programme 2011 aims to adapt Japan's IP sy stem to the change 
brought about by the rapid development of di gital technology. It identified IP strategic 
priorities in four areas:  international standa rdization; cutting-edge digital network; the 
culture industry and innovation. 
 
Questions: 
 1. Please explain the achievements made through the implementation of the said IP Strategic 
Programme.  2. Does international standardization cover license and transfer of IP? If yes, please specify 
whether the implementation of the Programme will be in violation of Article 40 of TRIPS and 
prevent technology from being transferred and disseminated.  
RESPONSE: 
(1) Through the implementation of the National IP Strategic Programme, various 
achievements were made such as the promo tion of the international standardization 
strategy in seven specific strategic fields , the promotion of the comprehensive "Cool 
Japan" strategy aiming at globalization of Japanese contents, and th e establishment of a 
patent system beneficial to Small- and Medium -sized Enterprises. 
 (2) The "International Standardization" plan in the National IP Strategic Programme 2011 is 
not relevant to the license or the tran sfer of IP at all.  Please refer to 
http://www.kantei.go.jp/jp/singi/titeki2/ipsp2011.pdf . 
 
IV. TRADE POLICIES BY SECTOR 
AGRICULTURE  
Page73(Para3) 
 
Under the Agricultural Land Law,” general co rporations" (including stock companies and 
other forms of corporations, profit or non-profit) are permitted to lease farmland. According to data provided by the authorities, 838 ge neral corporations were newly involved in 
agriculture between December 2009 and March 2012 ;  the authorities state that there are no 
data detailing general corporations ' share in agricultural production 
 
Questions: 
Please specify in detail the agricultural activities conducted by such general 
corporations.Whether Japanese government supervises such general corporations’ 
participation in agriculture or leasing farmla nd? Is there any adverse effect on farmers if 
private investment or non-agricultural commerc ial capital enters the agricultural sector? If 
any, whether the Japanese government has adopted any measure to avoid such adverse effect? 
 RESPONSE:  Japan has been publishing data on the number, the kinds of industries, and the 
main products of the newly involved corporations on the website of the Ministry of 
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.  
(http://www.maff.go.jp/j/keiei/koukai/sannyu/pdf/sannyu.pdf)  
e.g. 
Among 838 general corporations (as of Ma rch 2012) that were newly involved in
 agriculture, 
－48 percent of them produce vegetables; WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 258 
 
 
 －18 percent of them produce rice and wheat, etc.;  
－15 percent of them produce plural agricultural products. 
   While the government doesn’t place restric tions on general corporations’ entry into the 
agricultural sector, they need to get perm ission to lease farmland from a municipal 
agricultural committee and also need to report the use of farmland to the committee once a 
year in order to make sure that the farmland is utilized in an appropriate manner. 
If the farmland purchased by general corporati ons is abandoned or not  managed properly for 
agricultural production, it could not be easily recovered in the same way as leased farmland. 
Therefore, general corporations are only allowed to lease farmland, and restricted from 
purchasing farmland. 
 
Page 74 (Para 6) 
In 2010, the Government implemented a new single-year pilot direct-payment programme on 
rice.  Questions: 
Please specify in detail the implementation and the practice of this programme. Has Japan 
notified this programme?  
RESPONSE:  The payment is based on the gap between the production cost and the farm 
gate price, and all farmers who produce rice for the purpose of selling their products are 
eligible for the programme. (Farmers w ho produce only for self-consumption are not 
eligible.)  Work for notification is underway. 
 
Page 75 (Para 9) 
The average fill ratio in 2010 was about 63.5% but varies from one quota to another, from a low 
of 10.6% for butter and butter oil to 99.3% for dairy products for general use 
Questions: 
Please specify the reasons why there is such a big difference. 
 
RESPONSE:  The imports of the TRQ for “designated dairy products for general use” are 
implemented by state-trading with a view to stabilizing supply and demand for dairy 
products. The quota-fill of the TRQ has been nearly-full every year and imports of the TRQ play a major role in stabilizing supply an d demand situations in the domestic market. 
 All the other TRQs on dairy products are for pr ivate importers and a part of these TRQs is 
underfilled as the domestic consumption relate d to these TRQs has been declining. 
 
(i) Financial services 
 Page 87 (Para 45) 
…has been revised so that all transac tions on derivatives are subject to FSA 
supervision.  … 
 
Questions: 
Please specify the details of supervision by th e Financial Services Agency (FSA) on foreign 
institutional OTC derivatives transactions. Are th e standards of such supervision consistent 
with those of the superv ision on Japanese institutions? 
 
RESPONSE:  Financial Instrument Business Operat ors, whether foreign or domestic, are 
required to use central counterparties ( CCPs) for clearing certain OTC derivatives  
transactions by the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, and Financial Services Agency 
(FSA) supervise CCPs. In particular, FSA conduc ts oversight, such as orders for production   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 259 
 
 
 of report, on-site inspections, orders to im prove business operations, and rescissions of 
authorization, etc. for CCPs.  
Table IV.7 (Licensing:) 
 
Questions: 
Please specify the main contents of the “compar ability test” for licensing of foreign banks. 
What are the standards of being “substantially the same” in practice?  
RESPONSE:  The “comparability test” is conducted through comprehensive evaluation, 
taking into account a considerable number of factors.  
Table IV.7 (Bank deposit insurance scheme) 
 Questions: 
Does Japan's deposit insurance system cover fo reign banks? Whether fo reign banks will be 
excluded from Japan’s deposit insurance system due to the limitations on some business?  RESPONSE:  Currently, Japan’s deposit insurance sy stem does not cover deposits taken by 
foreign bank branches. This is because the business model and internal control system of 
foreign banks branches are quite various. 
 
Table IV.7 (Prudential regulations) 
 Questions: 
Please explain how the insurance business is “allocated administratively”?  RESPONSE:  Financial resources are not administ ratively allocated in the insurance 
business. 
 
Transport (a)Air transport 
Page 101(Para 80) 
Japan is a major air transport market both dom estically and internationally.  Japan has no 
specific regulation concerning computer reservation services or selling and marketing of air transport, which are under generic competition and company laws.  The trade regime of 
these sectors is completely liberalized in terms of GATS commitments, FTA commitments, and the applied regime.  No detaile d statistical data are available. 
 Questions: 
1. What are the allocation policies regarding the traffic rights of Japan ’s domestic 
companies in relation to the international routes? 
2. Are non-designated foreign airline comp anies permitted to conduct sales activities in 
Japan? If yes, please specify the conditions, such  as whether foreign airlines shall establish 
offices in Japan first? 
3. How will Japan punish foreign airlines if th ey violate regulations? Whether foreign airlines 
are required to pay some deposits?  
RESPONSE:  
(1.) We have allocated the international rout es by ensuring the interests through negotiations 
with other countries based on the needs of airlines. (2.) Non-designated foreign airline companies have been permitted to conduct sales activities 
in Japan. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 260 
 
 
 Japan does not specify the conditions, such as a requirement to establish a place of business 
in Japan. In order to conduct sales activities, airline comp anies are required to notify the Minister of 
Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism. 
(3.) If they violate regulations, they are punish ed on the basis of the Civil Aeronautics Act. 
Ex. If they do not submit notification of air tran sport agency business, th ey should pay a fine 
(not more than 300,000 yen).  
Page 101(Para 82) 
Airports are all publicly owned and publicly managed, but a recently published document 
defining the medium-long term strategy for avia tion mentions the possibility of establishing a 
concession regime and even privatization. 
 
Questions: 
1．Does the government grant policy support on operation and security of airports under the 
public ownership of airports? If any, please sp ecify in detail the source of funds and the 
method and the standards of support. 2. Please specify the progress of the concession regime or privatization of airports.  
RESPONSE: 
(1.) Japan does not have any specific support measures taken for the operation and the 
security of airports under the public ownership of airports. 
(2.) From the point of view of supporting growth  strategy in Japan, it is important to make 
airports serve as focal points for regional vitali zation by bringing more tourists and visitors. 
Therefore, we are seeking to unify aeronau tical and non-aeronautical activities according to 
local needs and context, and to make use of financial and management abilities of the private 
sector to improve efficiency of airport governance.  
PART II: QUESTIONS REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT REPORT 
II.TRADE AND INVESTMENT POLICY 
(1) OVERVIEW 
 
Page 6 (Para 6) 
According to a Ministry of Finance report, Japan's outflow of foreign direct investment (FDI) 
(Outward FDI) increased to ¥9, 126.2 billion in CY2011. 
 
Questions: 
1. What are the insurance products used by NEXI to provide insurance supports on Japan’s 
outward FDI? What is the coverage?  RESPONSE:  NEXI provides Overseas Investment In surance. This insurance covers losses 
suffered by a Japanese company with a subsidiary or a joint venture in a foreign country. The 
losses are incurred when the relevant subsidiary or  the joint venture is forced to discontinue 
business due to war, terrorism, or force majeure,  such as a natural disaster. The insurance also 
covers losses incurred when a Japanese company is unable to remit dividends to Japan due to 
prohibition of foreign currency exchange or suspension of remittance.  
2. Has NEXI ever paid any benefits in its ove rseas investment insurance? What are the main 
risks?  RESPONSE:  NEXI paid 780 million yen for political ri sks in overseas inv estment insurance 
from CY2001 through CY2011.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 261 
 
 
  
3. Has NEXI ever paid benefits for risks of indirect expropriation in its overseas investment insurance? If any, please specify the details.  
RESPONSE:  No. 
 
Page 7 (Para 11) 
Japan is currently a party to 13 Economic Pa rtnership Agreements (EPAs).  EPAs include 
elements of Free Trade Agreements and ins titution-building which cover such areas as 
investment, competition, and intellectual prope rty rights and human resources development. 
Japan is also engaged in several on-going ne gotiations for EPAs.  Japan believes that these 
agreements will serve as building blocks to achieve higher trade liberalization at the 
multilateral level.  
Questions: 
Please specify Japan’s position on Doha round and the actions taken by Japan to promote 
Doha negotiations. How does Japan balance the relationship between extensively joining or 
participating in negotiations for EPAs and promoting negotia tions for multilateral trade 
agreements?  
RESPONSE:  In line with the outcome of the Eigh th Ministerial Conference in December 
2011, Japan is continuously committed to expl oring different negotiating approaches to the 
DDA while respecting the principles of transpar ency and inclusiveness. At the same time, 
Japan has also promoted its regional and bilate ral trade policies as means of complementing 
the multilateral trading system, particularly  through Economic Part nership Agreements 
(EPAs). 
 
Page 7 (Para 14) 
Maintaining and strengthening the multilateral trading system under the WTO remains a 
fundamental basis of Japan’s trade policy.  Since the last review, despite the impasse 
reached in the Doha Development Agenda negotia tions, Japan has played an important role in 
pursuing progress.  In line with the outcome  of the Eighth Ministerial Conference in 
December 2011, Japan is continuously co mmitted to exploring different negotiating 
approaches while respecting the principl es of transparency and inclusiveness. 
 
Questions: 
Is there any practical plan to explore diffe rent negotiating approaches? Please specify the 
expected schedule of such a plan?  RESPONSE : In accordance with the Elements for Political Guidance issued at the MC8, 
Japan continues to work actively on advanci ng negotiations, where progress can be achieved, 
including focusing on the elements of the Doha Declaration to reach provisional or definitive 
agreements based on consensus earlier than th e full conclusion of the Doha Development 
Agenda negotiations.  
Page14 (Para 44) 
Efforts have also been made to raise the in terest of Japanese private sector in business in 
Africa through such ways as holding a sympos ium on this issue. Third, Japan has been 
promoting the "One Village, One Product (OVOP)" movement on….  
Questions: 
1. Please specify in detail the measures of OVOP. How can Japan realize the objective of 
expanding the size of bilateral trades? 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 262 
 
 
  
RESPONSE:  One Village, One Product (OVOP) is a typical approach under the Initiative. 
OVOP is a movement which intends to promot e local economies through the development, 
improvement and promotion of local products (f oods, beverages, textiles & garments, etc.) 
with the participation of local people. This  movement was first initiated in a southern 
prefecture in Japan in the late ‘70s and spread  to the other prefectures later on. It has been 
introduced to and has contributed to the de velopment of local economies in other Asian 
countries.  
The Government of Japan is now supporting these movements, especially the exports of 
developing countries and least developed count ries through technical cooperation such as the 
dispatch of experts and educational and traini ng programs to create competitive products. In 
addition, the Government of Japan has held e xhibitions and trade fairs inviting buyers and 
also is now opening shops (OVOP markets) in the international airports in Japan to introduce 
least developed countries products and encourage sales. Since the establishment of the airport 
stores, over one million people have visited the shops. 
 With the collaboration of African Embassies and trade promotion organizations, as well as 
our own JETRO (Japan External Trade Organiza tion), we will continue to hold various trade 
missions, fairs, and business matching events in order to expand the size of both inbound and 
outbound trade with African countries. 
 2. What changes will be made to the policies on trade and investment insurance in future? 
 RESPONSE:  It is difficult to prejudge a change in our trade / investment insurance policy, if 
any. 
 3. What measures will Japan adopt to facilitate  enterprises to make exports to Africa and 
underwrite credit insurance and gua rantee exporters’ interests? How about the benefits paid in 
relation to insurance on business in Africa?  
RESPONSE:  Measures which we adopt with regard  to credit insurance to Africa are 
institutionally the same as our genera l policies towards other regions. 
 The amount of insurance claims paid for Afri can transactions in 2011(FY) by NEXI was 407 
million yen. 
 
4. What special considerations have been ma de in determining the rates of export credit 
insurance (trade insuran ce) on business in Africa? 
 RESPONSE:  We do not set any special terms / cond itions on exports / investment insurance 
to Africa. NEXI provision of these credits is based on the terms and conditions of the OECD 
Arrangement on Officially Supported Export Credits. 
 (2) INVESTMENT POLICY 
Page 15 (Para 50) 
The Asian Business Location Bill (Bill on Special  Measures for the Promotion of Research 
and Development by Certified Multinational Ente rprises) was approved by the Diet in July 
2012.  The Act is to attract global compan ies establishing new R&D facilities and Asian 
regional headquarters in Japan; and global companies certified by the competent Minister will be granted corporate tax breaks, redu ced patent fees and other incentives. 
 
Questions: 
What kind of enterprises may enjoy such preferen tial policies stipulated in the Asian Business   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 263 
 
 
 Location Bill, including those on IPR? 
RESPONSE: 
The enterprises which may enjoy preferential tr eatment are those companies which meet the 
requirements specified under the law, such as the amount of experiment and research 
expenses and development expenses, number of employees, the amount of paid-in capital, the 
total amount of the employee salary, and so on. For more information, please refer to the “Act on Special Measures for Promotion of 
Research and Development Business, etc. by Specified Multinational Enterprises”. (below) 
http://www.meti.go.jp/english/policy/external_ economy/investment/asian_center201104.pdf 
 
III. TRADE AND INVESTMENT POLICY  
(5）INVESTMENT POLICY 
Page 15 (Para 49) 
On 22 June 2012, the Japanese government perfo rmed follow-up on the program, and the 
government decided to undertake the following initiatives, among others: 1) “Double Direct 
Investment into Japan” which refers to expandi ng the FDI inward stock to ¥35 trillion by the 
end of 2020; and 2) “Ope n Reconstruction” by promoting FDI in Japan. 
 
Questions: 
Please specify in detail of the plan of “Open Reconstruction”. 
 
RESPONSE: 
The concept of “Reconstruction open to the worl d” is indicated in the “Basic Guideline for 
Reconstruction in response to the Great East Jap an Earthquake”, which aims at the following 
targets: i) reconstruction of the disaster-affected areas and revitalization of the Japanese economy through absorbing the vitality of other countries, that is, targeting to expand a 
win-win relationship with foreign countries w ith regard to the reconstruction from the 
Earthquake; ii) active promotion of international cooperation in order to share internationally 
the knowledge and lessons obtained from the di saster and the process of reconstruction as 
global common assets.  Please refer to the website below for the details  of the “Reconstruction open to the world” 
concept: 
http://www.reconstruction.go.jp/topics/ basic_guidelines_reconstruction.pdf  
(Pages 30-31) 
 
Page 15 (Para 50) 
The Asian Business Location Bill (Bill on Special  Measures for the Promotion of Research 
and Development by Certified Multinational Ente rprises) was approved by the Diet in July 
2012.  The Act is to attract global compan ies establishing new R&D facilities and Asian 
regional headquarters in Japan; and global companies certified by the competent Minister will be granted corporate tax breaks, redu ced patent fees and other incentives. 
 
Questions: 
Shall all global companies obtain approvals from the competent Minister before they 
establish R&D facilities and Asian regional head quarters in Japan? Whether all global 
companies may obtain such approvals and enjoy such preferential policies and incentives? If 
not, please exemplify the cases when global co mpanies may not obtain such approvals. 
 
RESPONSE: 
Only those global companies which would like to enjoy the preferential treatment need to 
obtain approvals from the competent Minister.  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 264 
 
 
 The enterprises which may enjoy preferential tr eatment are those companies which meet the 
requirements specified under the law, such as the amount of experiment and research expenses and development expenses, the number of employees, the amount of paid-in capital, 
the total amount of the employee salary, and so on. 
 
For more information, please refer to the “Act on Special Measures for Promotion of 
Research and Development Business, etc. by Specified Multinational Enterprises”. (below) 
http://www.meti.go.jp/english/policy/external_ economy/investment/asian_center201104.pdf 
 
Page 16 (Para 52) 
From the viewpoint of harnessing global demand and making the most of the benefits of yen 
appreciation, Japan places a greater emphasis on the enhancement of foreign investment.  
Questions: 
1. As Japan is actively engaged in overseas i nvestment, what are the keys and objectives of 
such investment? Please specify in detail establis hing new “international investment rules”.  
2. What measures will Japan adopt to admi nister possible risks involved in overseas 
investment?  
RESPONSE: 
(1) Japan believes that its outward foreign investment is important for the following 
objectives, among others: -Meeting large-scale infrastructure demand overseas; -Securing natural resources, energy and food to meet its demands.  
(2) In order to administer possible risks involved in overseas investment, Japan takes 
measures such as 1) bilateral investment treaties, and 2) overseas investment insurance.  IV. JAPAN'S DOMESTIC POLICIES 
(3) INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS 
Page 20 (Para 79) 
In line with the amendment of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act in 2011 in which the 
devices and programs that circumvent technological restriction measures were regulated, the Customs Law has been amended and the devices and programs that circumvent technological 
restriction measures have been newly added to goods prohibited from being imported or 
exported. 
 
(4) FINANCIAL REFORM 
Page 21 (Para 81) 
In order to promote innovation by the appropr iate protection and utilization of intellectual 
property, Japan amended the Patent Act in 2011 including a review of the system for 
improving non-exclusive licenses, reviewing the patent fee reduction for small and medium 
sized enterprises, the development of remedi al measures for misappropriated applications, 
and revising the trial examination system.  
Page 21 (Para 82) 
Aiming at more appropriate protection of copy right, provisions relating to technological 
protection measures have been amended. 
 
Questions: 
Are the Customs Law, the Unfair Competition Pr evention Act and the Patent Law consistent 
in terms of technological restriction measur es? What are the devices and programs that 
circumvent technological restriction measures? Wh ether such provisions are consistent with 
the principle of fair use stipulated in TRIPS?   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 265 
 
 
  
RESPONSE: 
In terms of the definition of technological restri ction measures, the Customs Law refers to the 
same definition as provided in the Unfair  Competition Prevention Act. There are no 
provisions relating to technological restriction measures in the Patent Act. 
 With respect to the devices and programs that circumvent technological restriction measures in the Unfair Competition Prevention Act, please refer to Article 2, Paragraph 1, 
Subparagraphs 10 and 11 of the Act. 
 
Japan recognizes that all the measures are fu lly consistent with TRIPS Agreement. 
 
Page22 (Para 83) 
The Financial Services Agency (FSA) took va rious measures, such as the Act concerning 
Temporary Measures to Facilitate Financi ng for Small and Medium-sized Enterprises 
(SMEs), etc…. 
 
Questions: 
What are the main temporary measures promulgated by FSA to facilitate financing for SMEs? What are the effects and influences? 
 
RESPONSE:  ‘The implementation of the Act on Temporary Measures to Facilitate 
Financing for Small and Medium-Sized Ente rprises, etc.’ promotes facilitation of SME 
business by revising the loan terms (rescheduli ng, refinancing and reduction of interest 
payments) offered by financial institutions to SM Es. With regard to the revision of the loan 
terms, there were 4 million applications, and 3.7 million cases were approved among them (as 
of the end of September, 2012). The approval ratio exceeds 90 percent.  
Page22 (Para 87) 
Furthermore, in order to contribute to the rea lization of the Basic Plan, the Basic Policy and 
Action Plan for the Revitalization of Japan's Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries was 
introduced in October 2011. 
 
Questions: 
Please specify the Plan in detail, especially incl uding the measures to be adopted by Japan to 
“speed up intensification of the decentralized  agriculture sector and encourage young people 
to enter the agricultural sector”. 
 
RESPONSE: 
It is expected that the concentration of farmland will be accelera ted through intensive 
discussions among a wide range of stakeholders and through schemes to encourage transfer 
of farmland to core farmers at the timing of inheritance, among others , thereby enhancing the 
competitiveness and soundness of Japan’s agriculture. 
 With a view to raising eagerness among youth to enter into farming and improving their 
retention rate, the following measures will be promoted: support for young farmers’ stable 
business management; encouragement for young pe ople to join agricultural corporations; 
enhanced education for agricultural business mana gers with the aim of increasing the number 
of potential local leaders. For the details, please refer to the following website: http://www.npu.go.jp/policy/polic y05/pdf/20120815/ 20120815_en.pdf  
 
  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 266 
 
 
  
Other questions 
 1. Please specify the administration policies a dopted by Japan’s Customs on imports, such 
as import quota and how to allocate the quota. 
 RESPONSE:  For the general administration policies of Customs for import clearance, please 
refer to the Customs website below:  http://www.customs.go.jp/english/exp-imp/index.htm 
 
As to the administration of import quota, METI allocates the quotas to the importers, and Customs checks if the importers follow the quot as or not. For further information, please refer 
to the website below: http://www.meti.go.jp/policy/external_economy /trade_control/boekikanri/import/wariate/inde
x.htm (in Japanese only) 
 
2. Please specify in detail the administration system and rules adopted by Japan’s civil 
aviation sector in relation to environmental pr otection (noises at airports, air quality, climate 
change, waste water and garbage disposal).  
RESPONSE:  No system with a penalty in relation to  environmental protec tion exists in the 
civil aviation sector in Japan.  3. What measures will Japan adopt regarding the proposal of EU to include all flights of 
air carriers (including Japanese air carriers) other than EU air carriers into EU ETS in order to 
eliminate the effects of such inclusion on tran sportation and trade of Japanese civil aviation 
sector?  RESPONSE:  Countermeasures against global warming in the international aviation sector 
are being discussed within the Internatio nal Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).   
 
4. The development of international air tran sportation and the international trade will be 
affected if the civil aviation sector becomes th e source of global climate financing or MBM is 
adopted. Please specify Japan’s view on the said opinion and explain the reasons. If the United Nations Framework Conve ntion on Climate Change, the International Civil Aviation 
Organization or other multilateral organizati on passes similar resolutions, how will Japan 
react to the influence on the international trade? 
 RESPONSE:  At this moment, the civil aviation sector has not become a source of global 
climate financing, and MBM has not been adopted in this sector. Since the global warming issue in the civil aviation sector is important, it is necessary to take active measures to tackle 
this issue. Japan is of the view that  GHG reduction methods including Market Based 
Measures in the aviation sector should be globally addressed in ICAO, which has the 
necessary expertise.  5. Please specify in brief Japan’s low altitude  management system and the development 
of Japan’s general aviation sector. 
 
RESPONSE:  When the question is understood as to what measures are taken for the 
encouragement of growth of the general avia tion in low-altitude airspace, there are some 
measures, as follows: 1. Minimum Safety Altitude which allows aircraft to fly safely is regulated by the Civil 
Aeronautics Act in order to ensure the safet y of people on the ground and in the aircraft. 
2. Actions which might affect the flights of aircraft are restricted by the Civil Aeronautics Act   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 267 
 
 
 in the low-altitude airspace in the vicinity of  the airport. When these actions are performed, 
NOTAM (Notice to Air men) is issued to no tify the pilots of the actions. Also, LANDING 
MINIMA which specify safe weather conditions, su ch as visibility, for the related airport may 
be changed temporarily. 
3. A Civil Testing/Training Area is established for pilot training. Pilots can conduct training 
in a safe environment.  4. 8 Flight Service Centers are established to provide necessary information such as operational information or weat her information, etc. by radio to the pilot in the air. 
 
6. Does the Japanese government grant any policy support to the development of its 
general aviation sector? If yes, please specify in detail the source of funds and the methods and the standards of such supports.  RESPONSE:  Japan does not have any policy such as subsidies to support the general 
aviation sector. 
 
7. Please specify the development of Japan’s low cost aviation companies. Is there any 
difference between the policies adopted by the Japanese government on low-cost aviation 
companies and the policies on conventional avia tion companies in relation to market entry 
and allocation of the routes and the schedule? 
 
RESPONSE:  There is no difference between the policies on low-cost aviation companies 
and those on conventional aviation companies in re lation to market entry and allocation of the 
routes and the schedule.  
8. What are the laws and regulations on pr otecting travelers’ rights and interests? 
 RESPONSE:  These laws and regulations correspond to (1) Travel agency law, (2) Ordinance 
for enforcement of travel agency law, and (3)“ rules rega rding contracts which travel agencies 
conclude with travelers”.  
9. What are the support policies on R&D and application of homemade aeronautical 
telecommunication equipment and facilities, especi ally including policies of tax preference, 
government subsidies and preference in application?  RESPONSE:  Japan’s policies for the development of the manufacturing industry are fully 
compatible with the WTO rules. There is no support provided by the Government of Japan 
for the development of commercial aircraft except as outlined in the notification made pursuant to Article 25 of the Agreemen t on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures 
(G/SCM/N/186/JPN, G/SCM/N/220/JPN).  10. Please specify the health sta ndards for main types of grains (especially rice and maize) 
and the policies and technical measures to dis pose the grains not in compliance with the 
health standards (especially the non-compliance involving large quantity).  RESPONSE:  Based on the Food Sanitation Act, Japan sets various standards for food 
commodities, including maximum residue lim its (MRLs) for agricultural compounds and 
maximum levels for contaminants. 
 The maximum level for cadmium is set only in rice at 0.4 ppm for both polished and brown rice.  
For aflatoxin, 10 ppb is set as total aflatoxins for all commodities, including rice, maize, and 
their processed products. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 268 
 
 
  
Japan sets standards and specifications for foods  and related substances based on scientific 
risk assessment conducted by Japan’s Food Sa fety Commission. Also, Japan harmonizes its 
standards with Codex standards to the utmost extent possible. Japan’s MRLs for individual 
agricultural compounds are accessible at:  
http://www.ffcr.or.jp/zaidan/ffcrhome.nsf/TrueMainE?OpenFrameSet  
Regardless of the amount of cargo to be impor ted, any commodity that violates the above 
standards is not permitted to be imported to Japan.  
The rice shippers and distributors have a legal obligation to dispose of rice which does not 
meet the health standards of the Food Sanitation Act, or to distribute it only for non-food use, in line with the ministerial ordinance for the Act for Stabilization of Supply-Demand and 
Prices of Staple Food.  11. Please specify the quality and health requi rements for imported and exported grains 
and grain products (especially rice and maize and their products) and the basis thereof. 
 RESPONSE: The rice imported by MAFF is inspected for its quality including moisture 
content, existence of extraneous materials, a nd the ratio of damaged grains by the standards 
based on the Agricultural Products Inspection Law. Rice imported by private importers is 
inspected for its quality on a voluntary basis.  
 Regarding the health requirements, please refe r to the answer to Q35 of the follow-up 
questions from China.  
12. Please specify the regulations on the interv ention and subsidy polic ies related to grain 
prices as well as applicable laws, regulations  and illustrations of the Japanese government on 
the management of main types of grains.  RESPONSE:  As for intervention, there is no pric e support through administered price for 
rice, wheat or barley. 
 
As for subsidies, please refer to the answer to Q7 of the follow-up written questions from 
China for rice.  For wheat and barley, please refe r to para. 19 of chapter IV of the Secretariat 
report.  
13. Please explain the precise methods adopted  in the simultaneous buy-and-sell system 
and the influence of the system on the import price of rice and the price of domestic rice.  RESPONSE:  Under the SBS system, an actual user and an importer jointly bid for the 
tender. MAFF purchases imported rice from the importer and sells it to the actual user simultaneously based on the result of bid. It is difficult to evaluate the influence of the SBS 
system on the price of rice because it is influenced by various factors including production 
and stock level.  14. Please specify the current policies on imports  of agricultural products and the future 
trend of the policies to be stipulated regardi ng agricultural products, especially the practices 
of state-trading entities for importing rice, wheat, barley and other agricultural products 
through import tariff quotas.  
RESPONSE: 
Almost all of the imports of the TRQ for rice,  wheat, barley and a certain portion of dairy 
products are implemented by state-trading with  a view to stabilizing supply-demand for these 
products. The imports of all the other TRQs are for private importers.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 269 
 
 
 Japan is not planning any changes of the existing state-trading system. 
 
2 Thailand  
TRADE POLICY REVIEW OF JAPAN 
 
ADDITIONAL WRITTEN QUES TIONS FROM THAILAND 
 QUESTION REGARDING TH E SECRETARIAT REPORT 
 
III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE 
 Page 70 (paragraph 184) 
 
 “Chapter 4 of the AMA prohibits mergers and acquisitions if they lead to a substantial 
restraint on competition.106 On 1 July 2011, the JFTC abolished the "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 pro cedure 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.” 
 
Question: Could Japan please elaborate more on the main reason why the Commission decided 
to abolish the “prior consultati on system” and the effects afterwards? 
 
RESPONSE: Upon consideration of public comments made on the draft published by the Japan 
Fair Trade Commission (JFTC), the prior consultatio n system was abolished and the related Fair 
Trade Commission Rules were amended, with atte ntion to past review experience of the JFTC 
and to international conformity. The amendmen ts were, in accordance with the changes in 
circumstances including globalization of the ec onomy, intended to further improve the speed, 
transparency, and predictability of bus iness organizational restructuring.  
The details of the amendments ar e explained in the link below. 
http://www.jftc.go.jp/en/pressreleas es/archives/individual-000432.html 
 Before the prior consultation system was a bolished, important and large-scale business 
combinations were likely to be reviewed thro ugh the prior consultation system. Following the 
elimination of the system, the JFTC determines whether or not business combinations including 
important and large-scale transactions may substan tially restrain competition in any particular 
field of trade, collecting necessary information and analyzing such information, over a limited 
legal review period which cannot be extended. As a result, it is regarded that the speed, 
transparency and predictability of business comb ination review have been further improved. 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 270 
 
 
 3 Canada 
WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION 
Trade Policy Review of Japan 
February 19 and 21, 2013 
 
FOLLOW-UP QUESTIONS FROM THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA 
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measures: (vii) Government Procurement: 
paragraph 32, page 33, and 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measures: (vii) Government Procurement: paragraph 42, page 35: 
 
The Secretariat’s Report states that government  procurement is also used in Japan as an 
instrument of industrial policy for some sectors and to support SMEs.  
99. Does Japan have a definition of “SME”?  If  so please provide the definition as well as 
how it applies in the context of domestic procurement at the central and prefecture 
level? 
 
RESPONSE 
The definition of SMEs in Japan is stipulated  in Article 2 of the Small and Medium-sized 
Enterprise Basic Act:  http://www.chusho.meti.go.jp/sme _english/outline/08/01_01.html  
 
Under the Act on Ensuring the Receipt of Orde rs from the Government and Other Public 
Agencies by Small and Medium-sized Enterprise,  government at the central and government 
level and other public agencies endeavor to e xpand opportunities for SMEs to receive orders 
from the government and public agencies, by wa y of, inter alia, providing information on 
procurements.  
Follow up question: 
 
Does Japan have specific targets it is seeking in terms of SME participation (e.g. specific 
percentage of government procurement)?  RESPONSE: 
Under the Act on Ensuring the Receipt of Orde rs from the Government and Other Public 
Agencies by Small and Medium-sized Enterprise a nd the guideline of contract, government sets 
an annual target value of the procurements from SMEs.  This target is non-binding and does not ensure SM Es to be awarded with any actual contracts. 
 
100. Can Japan list any specific central and prefectural government programs and policies 
in support of SMEs?  
 
RESPONSE 
B. Central and prefectural governments are requ ested to expand opportunities for SMEs based 
on the policies and measures such as: 
・Arrangement for SMEs in the affected areas by the Great East Japan Earthquake 
・Ensuring provision of informa tion on government procurement 
・Considering the features of SMEs 
・Encouraging prevention of anti-dumping measures 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 271 
 
 
 Follow up question: 
Could Japan provide links to the information that explains how SMEs can take advantage  
of these programs?  
RESPONSE: The guideline mentioned in the response to Q1 sets out these programs.  
Here is the link to the information, although it is only available in Japanese. 
http://www.chusho.meti.go.jp/keiei/torihiki/2 012/download/0622keiyaku-houshin-2.pdf  
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practises by Measu re: (1) Measures directly affecting imports; 
(vii) Government Procurement: paragraph 39, page 35: 
 
The Secretariat’s Report states that The Act fo r the Promotion of Use of Wood in Public 
Buildings, issued on 19 May 2010, promotes the use of wood in the construction of public 
buildings. The Secretariat’s report also notes that  “the authorities maintain that the law is 
operated without distinction betw een domestic and imported goods.” 
 
28. Is the law operated without distinction be tween domestic and imported goods by both 
central and prefectural governments?  
 RESPONSE 
The aim of the “The Act for the Promotion of Use of Wood in Public Buildings” is to boost the 
use of wood in public buildings, regardless of its country of origin. The Act is implemented in 
accordance with this principle.  Follow up question:  It appears that the use of lumber is referenced in other laws such as the Long-life Quality 
Act and the Thinning Promotion Law, as well as programs under these laws.  (e.g. 
Model-Projects for Long-Life Quality Housin g). Do these laws also provide for no 
distinction between domestic and foreign wood  products for public construction? If yes, 
could Japan provide the specific articles in those Acts? 
 RESPONSE: 
The aim of the “Act on Special Measures for Pr omotion of Thinning” is to promote forest 
improvement by activities such as thinning or affor estation, in view of its  important function 
of carbon sequestration. Neither the Act nor the basic policy formulated in accordance with the 
Act includes any article which stipulates the use of wood or wood produc ts in construction of 
public buildings.  Under the Act for Promotion of Long-Life Qua lity Housing, approval standards for long-life 
quality housing do not provide for distinctions  between domestic and foreign wood products 
whether they set out for public construction or not. 
(No specific articles provide for distinction between domestic and fo reign wood products.) 
 
32. Are there subsidy programs available in this sector? If so, what are the eligibility 
criteria? 
 
RESPONSE 
Some subsidy programs are available for buildi ng of and decoration of interiors of public 
buildings in wood. The eligibility criteria for the subsidy programs are that the buildings are used for public purposes.  
  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 272 
 
 
 Follow up questions: 
Could Japan kindly provide the subsidies pr ograms granted by the Forestry Agency and 
the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Tr ansportation and Tourism (MLITT) and the 
eligibility criteria for suppliers?  
 
RESPONSE: 
The Forestry Agency has implemented a subsid y program which supports utilization of wood in 
public buildings. Here is the link to the detail,  although it is only available in Japanese:  
http://www.rinya.maff.go.jp/j/rinsei/yosankesan/pdf/25chiho19.pdf  
 
Those eligible for the program are entiti es such as local governments and  private 
organizations which are capable of building wood en public facilities or decorating interiors of 
public facilities with wood. Those facilities are al so required to be open to the general public 
and effectively foster public understanding on th e advantages and appealing features of using 
wood. 
 
MLIT has implemented a subsidy program: the Pilot Program for Wooden Building Techniques, 
which has supported constructions of large- scale wooden buildings introducing advanced 
designs and techniques in structural and fire-resistant aspects. This program also requires applicants to introduce advanced designs and tec hniques in structural and fire-resistant aspects 
and to meet a certain scale and the rate of lumber use. 
 
33. Can Japan provide additional details on how it ensures that the law operates “without 
distinction between domestic and imported goods”? 
 
RESPONSE Please refer to the answer to Q29. The central  government instructs prefectural governments to 
implement them in accordance with WTO rules.  The Government of Japan has not been 
informed of any cases of prefectural governments not complying with the law.  
 
Follow up question: 
 
Canadian industry has noted that incentive  programs are offered to homebuyers and 
builders by local and prefectural governments for homes built with local wood. Industry 
has specifically cited Kumamoto and Kyoto prefectures. Could Japan explain what 
measures it is taking to ensure these local governments follow Japan’s international trade 
obligations? 
 RESPONSE: 
The Government of Japan instructs prefectural  governments to implement their programs in 
conformity with WTO rules. The government has not been informed of any cases of prefectural 
governments not complying with the rules, including Kumamoto and Kyoto prefectures.  Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (vii) Government Procurement: 
paragraph 40, page 35:  
The Secretariat’s Report notes that in accordan ce with the Basic Guideline for Public 
Procurement of Information Systems (March  2007), where Information Systems contracts 
“affecting a design or development is estimated to be not less than ¥500 million, it must be divided”.  The Report also explains that govern ment organizations are required to formulate 
procurement plans.    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 273 
 
 
 34.  Could Japan please explain the rationale for dividing a procurement under this 
guideline and explain how the procurements ar e divided? Is the division of procurement 
specified in the tender documentation?  
 
RESPONSE to 34 and 36 The purpose of “divided procurement” is to im prove competition in procurement of large-scale 
information systems, such as by preventi ng a vendor lock-in of the procurement. 
 Specifically, procurement is divided when the valu e of procurement is estimated to be not less 
than 500 million JPY. The procuring entity is required to divide the procurement into 
appropriate and reasonable units such as “procure ment of design/development of the system” or 
“procurement of operation of the system,” so th at not only specific suppliers but additional 
suppliers would be able to par ticipate in tenders in order to  secure sufficient competitiveness. 
 These rules are stipulated in the Basic Guideline on the Government Procurement of IT system.  
Division of procurement is not described in tender documentation, but specified in the 
procurement plans.  
Follow up questions: 
 
Could Japan explain if there are any other guidelines or laws for other sectors requiring 
the division of procurement? If yes, could Japan provide details and public information on 
these?  RESPONSE: 
There are no other guidelines or laws for other sectors which require divided procurement.  
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (vii) Government Procurement: 
paragraph 41, page 35: 
 
The Secretariat’s Report states that for forei gn suppliers, a central-government-wide unified 
qualification could be granted for participa ting in tendering contracts for, inter alia, 
manufacturing, sales of products, and offers of servi ce. It also states that 77,592 firms (of which 
264 were either wholly or partially owned by foreigners) have this qualification. 
 
42. Is there a registry of “central-government-w ide unified qualified” suppliers? If so, how 
often is this list created and for what period of time is the qualification granted? 
 
RESPONSE 
There is a registry of “central-government-wid e unified qualification” and it is updated on a 
daily basis. The qualification is granted for a peri od of 3 years (Current period: April 1, 2010 to 
March 31, 2013. Next period: April 1, 2013 to March 31, 2016). The qualification can be 
granted at any point during the 3-year-period, bu t the expiration date of the qualification will be 
the last day of each period. (For example, currently (as of February 2013) obtained qualifications expire on March 3, 2013. Those qua lifications obtained between April 1, 2013 
and March 31, 2016 will ex pire on March 31, 2016). 
 Follow up question:  Do suppliers who wish to renew their qualificat ion need to re-submit all documents or can 
suppliers simply update their registration?   
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 274 
 
 
 RESPONSE: 
When the qualification is expired and they wish  to renew it, they need to re-submit all 
documents.  
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measure: (vii) Government Procurement: 
paragraph 43, page 36: 
 
The Secretariat’s Report indicates the Act for Promoting Proper Tenderi ng and Contracting for 
Public Works defines major policy instruments for preventing bid rigging and other improper 
actions. 
 
47. Are CHANS decisions binding and does CHANS provide for compensation? 
 
RESPONSE 
Designation of Applicable Measures Concerning Government Procurement （Decision by the 
Office of Government Procurement Review ）specifies that “The Procuring Entity shall, in 
principle, and as its own decision, duly follow the recommendations of the Government 
Procurement Review Board on any complaints brou ght appropriately before the Board,” thus its 
decisions are not legally binding.  CHANS does not provide for compensation. 
 
Follow up questions: 
 Given that decisions from the Office of G overnment Procurement Review are not binding 
and that CHANS does not provide for compensation, could Japan explain how its bid challenge system meets its obligations under Article XVIII.7? Could Japan also clarify if 
CHANS is an independent mechanism? 
 RESPONSE: 
(1) (Japan would like to answer this question assumi ng that Canada’s question relates to Article 
XX:7 of the Agreement, not Article XVIII:7.) 
 
Japan believes its CHANS system meets its obligation under the Article XX:7 as all the 
requirements in the Article are included in the procedure of the CHANS.   Details of the procedure can be found at the following website:  http://www5.cao.go.jp/access/english/tetuzuki-e.html 
(Please refer to paragraph 6.) 
 (2) "Public Announcement of the Complaints file d into the Government Procurement Review 
Board" (1 December 1995, Cabinet Decision) specifies that the Government Procurement 
Review Board reviews complaints filed w ith respect to procurement by the central 
government entities and other central gove rnment-related entities impartially and 
independently with reference to the procurem ent procedures set forth by the Agreement and 
the applicable measures designated separately by the Head of The Office of Government 
Procurement Review (hereafter referred to as "the OGPR") as well as in compliance with the complaint review procedures adopted by the OGPR. Therefore, the Government 
Procurement Review Board is an impartial and independent review body with no interest in 
the outcome of the procurement. 
 
Part III. Trade Policies and Practices by Measu re: (1) Measures Directly Affecting Imports 
(viii) Standards, technical regulations and phy tosanitary measures: paragraph 59, page 41: 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 275 
 
 
 60. Are there any sectors in which Japan requires that CABs be physically or legally 
established in Japan in order to be recogni zed? If so, please provide a list of such sectors. 
RESPONSE 
Yes, the medical device sector falls under this category.  
Follow-up question: 
 Beyond the medical device sector, please provide a list of sectors in which Japan  
requires that CABs be physically or legally est ablished in Japan in order to be recognized. 
 
RESPONSE: 
Only the medical device sector falls under this category. 
 
Part IV. Trade Policies by Sector: (1) Agricu lture; (ii) Border measures: paragraph 9, 
page 75: 
 
The report states that "Japan operates 18 tariff qu otas covering 175 tariff lines, mainly for dairy 
products and cereals (including rice), unchanged since 2011. The average fill ratio in 2010 was 
about 63.5% but varies from one quota to another, from a low of 10.6% for butter and butter oil to 99.3% for dairy products for general use (Table AIV.1)." Furthermore, the report states 
"There have been no changes to the administrati on of TRQs since the last Review of Japan." 
 
79. Could Japan explain the low fill rates from 2007 to 2010 for many of the tariff quotas 
presented in Table AIV.1 and indicate whet her Japan will make changes to its 
administration of tariff quotas as a consequence? 
 
RESPONSE 
The underfill of TRQs for concerned products is ma inly attributed to the decline of the domestic 
consumption related to these TRQs. Concerni ng unused quotas, a scheme of reallocation has 
been already implemented.  Follow up question:  Could Japan provide additional details on the reallocation scheme it has implemented? 
 RESPONSE: 
When the quota is not fully allocated to importers because there has not been enough 
applications, or when a certain volume of unused quotas is returned by the importers, the government takes applications for the reallocation of these unused quotas. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 276 
 
 
 4 United States 
TRADE POLICY REVIEW OF JAPAN 
Follow-up Questions from the United States 
 
Page 22, paragraph 6: The Secretariat report notes that upon request, written advance rulings are 
published on the customs website, and that these rulings are not binding. 
- What subject matters does the customs service provide advance rulings on? 
- As Japan does not provide binding advance rulings, please explain how advance rulings 
are used by importers? 
- Please explain how Japan’s customs servi ce uses these advance rulings, or more 
specifically the status of the advan ce rulings with the customs service? 
- Can an importer rely on the advance ruling issu ed at any port of entry in Japan, or are 
advance rulings port specific? 
- Approximately how many advance ruling requests a year does Japan receive? 
- Approximately how many advance rulings does Japan issue in a year? 
- Under what circumstances will Japan  not issue an advance ruling? 
 RESPONSE:  Japan Customs does issue binding rulings at  the request of the importers or other 
interested persons, fully complying with Standard 9.9 and guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention and such rulings are honored by Japan Customs. 
 
By utilizing the advance ruling system, importers can calculate customs duties and so on more 
accurately in advance of import declarations. And they also expedite the handover of the goods 
by attaching the response paper at the time of import declaration.  
【Standards 9.9 of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
The Customs shall issue binding rulings at the requ est of the interested person, provided that the 
Customs have all the information they deem necessary. 
【Guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
 
In some administrations, they may be legally bi nding and provided for in national legislation, 
whereas in others there may simply be a co mmitment by the Customs to honor the ruling. 
※Japan would like to correct the last sentence in Paragraph 6 as follows. 
 
At the request of importers and other concerne d parties, Japan issues written advance rulings. 
Such rulings are honored by Customs at the time of import declarations, and published on the 
Customs website for the reference of the public.  
U.S. Follow-up Question:   We appreciate the additional information provided by Japan 
Customs regarding advance rulings. However, we remain interested in responses to the 
other questions asked for which ther e was no response.  Specifically:  
- Please indicate what subject matters does the customs service provide advance 
rulings on (for example, valuation, classification, rules of origin)? 
- Can an importer rely on the advance ruling issued at any port of entry in Japan, 
or are advance rulings issued by Japan Customs port specific? 
 
- Approximately how many advance ruling requests a year does Japan receive? 
- Approximately how many advance rulings does Japan issue in a year? 
- Under what circumstances will Japan not issue an advance ruling upon request of 
an importer or other interested person? 
 RESPONSE: 
- What subject matters does the customs service provide advance rulings on?    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 277 
 
 
 A. Japan provides an advance ruling system on Tariff classification, Customs valuation 
and the Rules of origin. 
- As Japan does not provide binding advance rulings, please explain how advance rulings 
are used by importers? 
A. Japan Customs does issue binding rulings at the request of the importers or other 
interested persons, fully complying with Standard 9.9 and guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention and such rulings are honored by Japan Customs. By utilizing the advance ruling system, im porters can calculate customs duties and 
so on more accurately in advance of import declarations. And they also expedite the 
handover of the goods by attaching the r esponse paper at the time of import 
declaration. 
【Standards9.9 of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
The Customs shall issue binding rulings at  the request of the interested person, 
provided that the Customs have all th e information they deem necessary. 
【Guidelines of the WCO Revised Kyoto Convention 】 
In some administrations, they may be legally binding and provided for in national 
legislation, whereas in others there may si mply be a commitment by the Customs to 
honor the ruling. 
※Japan would like to correct the last sentence in Paragraph 6 as follows. 
At the request of importers and other concerned parties, Japan issues written 
advance rulings. Such rulings are honored by Customs at the time of import declarations, and published on the Customs we bsite for the reference of the public. 
- Please explain how Japan’s customs servi ce uses these advance rulings, or more 
specifically the status of the advan ce rulings with the customs service? 
A. Customs honors response papers of advan ce rulings on customs examination of 
import declarations. It is effective for three years at longest. 
- Can an importer rely on the advance ruling issu ed at any port of entry in Japan, or are 
advance rulings port specific? A. Importers can rely on it at any port. 
- Approximately how many advance ruling requests a year does Japan receive?   
A. In 2012, Japan received 7,509 advance ruling requests on Tariff classification, 9 of 
them on Customs valuation and the number of requests is not counted on Rules of origin. 
- Approximately how many advance rulings does Japan issue in a year? 
A. In 2012, Japan issued ? advance rulings on Tariff classification, 9 of them on 
Customs valuation and 539 of them on Rules of origin. 
- Under what circumstances will Japan  not issue an advance ruling? 
A. If the request is not about actual goods; if  the inquired goods are reviewed by 
judicial, arbitral or administrative tribuna ls or under administrative procedures; if 
the importer does not provide required information to issue; and so on. 
 
Page 35, paragraph 39: According to the Secretar iat report, Japan has set a goal of securing half 
of Japan’s domestic demand for wood from the use of domestic wood. 
 
‐ Is Japan still considering the introduction th is coming spring of an “eco-point” subsidy  
program for consumer purchases of “local wood (chiiki-zai)?”  If so, please describe 
the program to be implemented, and the timing for implementation. 
‐ In fully specific terms, how can foreign supp liers of foreign wood become eligible for 
this program, if implemented?  In additi on, describe the procedure whereby foreign 
suppliers could receive the “local wood (chiik i-zai)” designation that appears to be the 
key criteria necessary to join the program ?  Also, would the foreign supplier be 
required to have a local presence in Japan, or within specific prefectures, to qualify?   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 278 
 
 
 ‐ What legal requirements are in place to determine whether wood qualifies as “local 
wood (chiiki-zai)?” 
‐ Which governments or organizations are ab le to determine whether wood qualifies as 
“local wood (chiiki-zai)?” 
 RESPONSE:  Japan is now considering introducing this coming spring a program that will 
provide “wood-use points” to those who build wo oden houses, decorate interiors with wood, 
and buy wood products. These points earned throug h the program could be exchanged for such 
items as agricultural, forest and fishery products.  Japan is currently considering the specific 
conditions of this program.   
 
U.S. Follow-up Question:   Japan indicated that it is now considering introducing a 
program that would provide “wood-use-points” that could be exchanged for such items as 
agriculture, forest and fishery products, but that the specifics of the program are under 
consideration.  How does Japan plan to noti fy other Members about how this program 
will be applied?  RESPONSE: 
For the outline of the program, please refer to  the following websites (in Japanese only):  
http://www.rinya.maff.go.jp/j/riyou/point/index.html  (uploaded on 8th March) 
 
The Japanese  government plans to release further details as they are developed.  
 Page 42, paragraph 61:  The Secretariat’s report states that “over 30 of the revisions (notified 
to the WTO) include changes to maximum residue limits (MRLs) for pesticides and 
amendments on food additives.”  Japan’s du al system for classifying pesticides system 
presents significant deterrents from registering post-harvest fungicides.  If a pesticide is applied to a crop before harvest it is classified as a pesticide. If the same pesticide is applied to a 
crop after harvest it is considered a food additive.   If an applicant wishes to register a pesticide 
for post and pre harvest use, it is our un derstanding that Japan requires two separate 
applications.  This system for restricting a pesticide is lengthy and expensive.  How does 
Japan explain its need for having a dual classi fication system under this scenario?  How does 
this dual classification system prevent duplication of resources and inefficiencies for registering 
pesticides?   
RESPONSE:  Under the Japanese legal system, a fungicide that is applied to crops after harvest 
exclusively for preserving them is categorized  as a food additive under the Food Sanitation Act. 
This legal classification will not change even in the future.  If a fungicide for which maximum residue limits (MRLs) have already b een set as a pesticide 
based on the Food Sanitation Act is applied af ter harvest, it requires designation (pre-market 
approval) as a food additive. In the designation of a food additive, the applicant is requested to 
submit some documents, but Japan believes that they do not exceed the scope of those required for pesticide registration in the United States. Therefore, Japan does not consider that the 
existing Japanese system results in an excessi ve burden in terms of time and costs. 
 
The designation of food additives and the revisi on of existing MRLs for pesticides both require 
risk assessment by the Food Safety Commission of Japan (FSC) and review by the Ministry of 
Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) based on the risk assessment by the FSC. Since May 
2010, the Expert Committee on Pesticide Residue  in the FSC has invited the appropriate 
members of the Expert Committee on Food Additiv es to join the Expert Committee on Pesticide 
Residues meetings. Reviews by the MHLW are carried out at two separate committees (on food 
additives and on pesticide residues). The MHLW co nducts them in a time-efficient manner, for 
example, by holding committee meetings during the same period. Therefore, Japan does not   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 279 
 
 
 consider that the Japanese system, which the United States calls a dual classification system, 
results in a lengthy procedure. In addition, th e MHLW is making the utmost efforts to speed up 
the procedure, for example, by making a SPS notification to the World Trade Organization and inviting domestic public comments in pa rallel with the committee meetings. 
 
If a pesticide is used in Japan  for the purpose of plant protection in agriculture, it requires 
premarket registration based on the Agricultu ral Chemicals Regulation Law. In pesticide 
registration, regardless of whether a pesticide is  used pre-harvest or post-harvest, it will be 
registered on the condition that the pesticid e does not cause any problems concerning the 
following three aspects under proposed good agricultur al practice (GAP): 1) pesticide residues 
in crops, 2) occupational safety, and 3) adverse environmental effects. This process is similar to 
that of the pesticide registration in the United States.  
 
U.S. Follow-Up Question:   With regards to Japan’s response to the above question on 
classification of postharvest fungicides as food  additives, in addition to inviting members 
of the Expert Committee on Food Additives to  join the meetings of the Expert Committee 
on Pesticide Residues, what other steps ha s Japan considered to further streamline the 
review and establishment of new residue limits for postharvest fungicides?  Specifically, 
what law prevents the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (MHLW) from developing 
resources to conduct in-house reviews for new compounds?  Has MHLW considered 
increasing the frequency of Expert Committ ee meetings or becoming a more active 
participant in global joint reviews?  
RESPONSE: Both procedures for designation of food additives and revision of the existing 
MRLs for pesticides require the risk assessment by the Food Safety Commission of Japan (FSC) 
and review by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) based on the risk 
assessment by the FSC. As already responded to in the previous US question, Japan has 
provided maximal effort to take appropriate  measures to streamline the procedure for 
designation and establishment of MRLs. Specifically, the MHLW has held two separate committee meetings (on food additives and on pesticides/veterinary drugs) during the same 
period. In addition, the MHLW submits SPS notifications and invites domestic public 
comments in parallel with the committee meeti ngs. The MHLW is going to make efforts to 
improve the efficiency of the procedure with respect to each individual case in cooperation with 
the FSC.  It would be almost impossible to increase the personnel, because the Cabinet decided on July 1, 
2009 that the number of government officials in each ministry should be reduced by ten percent 
at the end of FY 2009 over five years from FY 2010 to FY 2014.  The MHLW is not of the view that an increase in the frequency of the two meetings would lead to streamlining required procedures. This is  because the MHLW holds each meeting without 
any unnecessary delay after the necessary prep aration upon receiving the assessment results 
from the FSC. 
 Japan recognizes that global joint reviews are ac tivities in which individual countries assess the 
risk of new pesticide ingredients based on the same information to harmonize assessment results 
and the MRLs set in light of them. Even if the MHLW participates in joint reviews, the 
agreements in reviews cannot be directly reflect ed into Japan’s MRLs, and instead, the drafted 
MRLs will have to undergo anew risk assessmen t by the FSC. Therefore, the MHLW is of the 
view that frequent participation in global joint reviews would not necessarily lead to streamlining the setting of standards. Also, it would be very difficult for the MHLW to participate in joint reviews due to human resource constraints.   
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 280 
 
 
 Page 44, paragraph 70:   The Secretariat’s report states that country of origin labeling of 
ingredients is “mandatory for domestically prod uced processed food.”  Is country of origin 
labeling of ingredients required for all domestically produced processed food?  If not, please 
clarify which processed products require such labeling. 
 
RESPONSE: In Japan, according to the JAS Law, domes tically processed food products must 
label the place of origin for the main ingredients co ntained in the product. This rule is applied to 
the food groups and 4 items listed below:   
22 Food Groups 
1. Dried mushrooms, vegetables and fruit 
2. Salted mushrooms, vegetables and fruit 
3. Boiled or steamed mushrooms, vegetables, pulses and bean paste 
4. Mixed cut vegetables, fruit and ve getables, mixed fruit and mushrooms 
5. Green tea and green tea beverages 
6. Pounded rice 
7. Roasted unshelled peanuts, roasted p eanuts, fried peanuts and roasted pulses 
8.Brown sugar and processed brown sugar products 
9. Konjac 
10. Seasoned meat 
11. Boiled or steamed meat and edible chicken eggs 
12. Seared meat 
13. Battered meat for deep-frying 
14. Ground beef, pork and other mixed meats 
15. Dried or salted seafood, seaweed, dried seaweed, and other types of dried seaweed 
16. Salted seafood and seaweed 
17. Seasoned seafood and seaweed 
18. Rolled seaweed cooked in sauce 
19. Boiled or steamed seafood and seaweed 
20. Seared seafood 
21. Battered seafood for deep-frying 
22. Mixture of perishable foods other than those in 4 or 14 
 
4 Items 
Pickled farm products 
Frozen vegetables 
Grilled eel 
Dried bonito flakes 
 
U.S. Follow-Up Question: Japan replied that its place of origin labeling rule is applied to 
certain listed food groups and four items.  Can Japan further explain how it determined the list of food products and items subject to this rule? Does Japan intend to revise this list 
in the future?  
 
RESPONSE: Labelling of place of origin of ingredient  is applied to food categories based on 
the criteria mentioned below; 
a) When it is generally recognized that the quality of the ingredient, which constitutes the 
product, affects significantly the overall quality of a processed food, and 
b) When the weight of the ingredient accounts for more than fifty percent of total weight of a 
processed food and this ingredient is composed of a single element originating either from non-processed farm, livestock or marine material. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 281 
 
 
 Regarding the criteria above mentioned, Japan w ill continuously make its efforts to steadily 
increase in the number of food products applicable for labelling of place of origin of ingredients.  Page 75, paragraph 9 and Pa ge 135 Table AIV.1 (Tariff quota and in-quota imports, 
FY 2007-2010): 
‐ Japan’s average tariff quota fill rate in 2010 was 63.5 percent.  Please explain why the 
rate is not higher.   
‐ Please explain Japan’s administrative procedure for filling agricultural tariff rate quotas 
and Japan’s plans to improve its fill rates of  tariff quotas, including for butter and butter 
oil. 
‐ With respect to butter imports eligible for u se at international trade fairs, we understand 
that, in addition to the requirements deta iled in document “International #1241, Year 24 
(2012) Tariff Rate Quota Announcement #48 re garding the Tariff Rate quota for Butter 
and Butter Oil for the Fiscal Year 2012,” MAFF imposes additional requirements on retailers before, during and after completion of promotional events.  Please describe the 
nature and purpose of these additional requirements.  
 
RESPONSE:  Japan operates TRQs in a manner consiste nt with WTO Agreements and in a fair 
and transparent manner. The underfill of TRQs fo r some products is mainly related to the 
decline of domestic consumption related to these TRQs.  
The allocation of tariff quotas for agricultural pr oducts is implemented by the Ministry of 
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) in  accordance with the Government Ordinance on 
the tariff quota system. For details on the a llocation for each product, please refer to the 
notification (MA:1) to the Committee on Agricu lture. Concerning unused quotas, a scheme of 
reallocation has been implemented.  
  “Butter and butter oil” is imported according to the requirements in the document “Tariff 
Rate Quota Announcement”, and no further requi rements are imposed. Based on this document, 
MAFF asks applicants to confirm whether importe d products will be used for the specific 
purpose appropriately.  U.S. Follow-up Question:  With respect to Table AIV.1, Japan indicated that there are no 
further requirements outside those prescribed under “Tariff Rate Quota Announcement.”  
Can Japan confirm that interested importers are not required to meet additional written instructions or conditions beyond what is sp ecifically outlined in the Announcement?   
 Japan also stated that based on the “Tariff Rate Quota Announcement” MAFF 
asks applicants to confirm whether import ed products will be used for the specific 
purpose appropriately.  Can Japan explain how MAFF goes about confirming the 
products are used appropriately?  
 RESPONSE: 
All items are imported according to the requirements in the document of “Tariff Rate Quota 
Announcement”, and no further requirements are imposed. 
  Those who received assignment need to submit a written report on actual imports and use a 
track record.  
MAFF examines whether the products have been imported and used appr opriately with the 
report.  
Page 75, paragraph 9 and Pa ge 135 Table AIV.1 (Tariff quota and in-quota imports, 
FY 2007-2010): 
‐ Japan’s average tariff quota fill rate in 2010 was 63.5 percent.  Please explain why the 
rate is not higher. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 282 
 
 
 ‐ Please explain Japan’s administrative procedure for filling agricultural tariff rate quotas 
and Japan’s plans to improve its fill rates of  tariff quotas, including for butter and butter 
oil. 
‐ With respect to butter imports eligible for u se at international trade fairs, we understand 
that, in addition to the requirements deta iled in document “International #1241, Year 24 
(2012) Tariff Rate Quota Announcement #48 re garding the Tariff Rate quota for Butter 
and Butter Oil for the Fiscal Year 2012,” MAFF imposes additional requirements on retailers before, during and after completion of promotional events.  Please describe the 
nature and purpose of these additional requirements.  
 RESPONSE:  Japan operates TRQs in a manner consiste nt with WTO Agreements and in a fair 
and transparent manner. The underfill of TRQs fo r some products is mainly related to the 
decline of domestic consumption related to these TRQs. 
 
The allocation of tariff quotas for agricultural pr oducts is implemented by the Ministry of 
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) in  accordance with the Government Ordinance on 
the tariff quota system. For the details of the allocation for each product, please refer to the 
notification (MA:1) to the Committee on Agricu lture. Concerning unused quotas, a scheme of 
reallocation has been implemented. 
 
  “Butter and butter oil” is imported according to the requirements in the document “Tariff 
Rate Quota Announcement”, and no further requi rements are imposed. Based on this document, 
MAFF asks applicants to confirm whether importe d products will be used for the specific 
purpose appropriately. 
 
U.S. Follow-up Question:   Regarding unused dairy quotas and the implementation of a 
reallocation scheme, can Japan please explain how this reallocation scheme works?  Has 
it been fully implemented?  If so, when wa s it implemented?   How is such a scheme 
expected to improve Japan’s low quota-fill rate?  Finally, can Japan clarify whether this scheme will be implemented on all of Japan’s WTO tariff-rate quotas or does it just apply 
to unused dairy tariff-rate quotas? 
 RESPONSE: 
When the quota is not fully allocated to importers because there has not been enough 
applications, or when a certain volume of unused quota is returned by the importers, the 
government takes applications for the realloca tion of these unused quota. This scheme is 
implemented not only on dairy tariff rate quotas but also on other WTO tariff-rate quotas.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 283 
 
 
 5 EU 
 
EU FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS 
 
WT/TPR/G276 
 
IV JAPAN’S DOMESTIC POLICIES 
(7) SERVICES-RELATED POLICIES   
 
Pages 23-24 
According to the report, a new policy measure on preferential treatment in the immigration 
procedure for foreign professionals was introduced  in May 2012 for the purpose of promoting 
the acceptance of more highly skilled foreign nationals.   
Q12:  May Japan explain how this measure fits together with Japan's  notification under 
S/C/N/659? In particular, what are the periods of stay that currently apply to each of the 
categories in Japan's mode 4 GATS commitments?  RESPONSE  
Horizontal Commitments of Mode 4 of Japan’s GATS schedule are defined as categories a), b) and c). Under the provisions of existing domestic laws, category a) corresponds to the status of 
residence of “Intra-company Transferees” with periods of stay of “3 months”, “1 year”, “3 years” or “5 years”, category b) to the status of residence of “Legal/Accounting Services” with 
periods of stay of “3 months”,”1 year”, “3 year s” or “5 years”, and category c) to the status of 
residence of “Temporary Visitor” with periods of stay of ”90 days”, “30 days”, “15 days” or 
less. 
 If a natural person who falls under category a) or  b) is recognized as a “highly skilled foreign 
professional” as a consequence of applying for permission of entry and temporary stay by 
utilizing the points-based system, the maximum “5-year” period of stay will be given to him/her 
uniformly as the preferential treatment. In this sen se, this measure fits together with Japan’s 
notification under S/C/N/659. 
 However, entry and temporary stay of tho se who are recognized as “highly skilled foreign 
professionals” are not covered under the Commitments of Japan schedule.  Follow-up question  Does the above response provided by Japan mean that a natural person 
who complies with all the necessary requirements to be classified as category a) or b) in 
accordance with Japan's schedule of mode 4 co mmitments under GATS may still not be granted 
the maximum period of stay of 5 years, as men tioned in such commitments, if he/she is not 
recognised as a "highly skilled professional" under th e points-based system? If this is the case, 
please clarify how Japan considers that such a situation is compatible with Japan’s GATS 
commitment to grant a length of stay of up to 5 years. 
 RESPONSE: 
No, it does not. Japan’s answer m eans that even if a natural pe rson who falls under category a) 
or b) in accordance with Japan’s schedule of mode 4 commitments under GATS is not 
recognized as a "highly skilled professional", he/she may be  granted the maximum period of 
stay of 5 years, while those who are recognized as a "highly skilled professional" will be  granted 
the maximum period of stay of 5 years uniformly  as a preferential immigration treatment. 
 
 
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 284 
 
 
 WT/TPR/S276 
(vii) Government procurement  
Page 33, Para 32 
The WTO secretariat notes that Japan's governme nt procurement policy 'is also used as an 
instrument of industrial policy for some sectors and to support SMEs.' 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. The Basic Guideline for Public Procurement of 
information Systems has, therefore, the effect of slicing up public procurement contracts into 
several small pieces even if this is not technica lly necessary making it more difficult for foreign 
companies to compete. 
 
Q26: Can the Japanese government explain whether limited tendering and intentional 
contract splitting is GPA compatible and explain the justification for the perpetuation of such 
an approach? 
 
RESPONSE:  The Government of Japan conducts it s government procurement covered by the 
GPA in a manner consistent with its commitments under the Agreement.  
Follow up question: 
Can Japan indicate which concrete measures hav e been taken to make sure that there is no 
abuse by procuring entities?  
 
RESPONSE: 
For the Annexes 1 and 2 entities, specific Cabinet Orders for each Annex regulates the procurement of these entities in consistent with the GPA. 
 For the Annex 3 entities, accounting regulation for each entity is set force in consistence with 
the GPA. The Government ensures that the regul ation is in consistence with the GPA based on 
such laws as the General Rule Act for Inde pendent Administrative Corporations or the 
establishment law of the entity. 
 
viii) Standards and technical regulations 
(a) Standards and technical regulations 
 
Page 37, Para 44 
The report mentions the Pharmaceuticals Affairs Law (PAL) as one of the main technical 
regulations applicable in Japan. The Europ ean medical devices industry has had longstanding 
concerns with the fact that the PAL covers both pharmaceuticals and medical devices, even 
though these two types of products are substantially  different. This leads to overly burdensome 
authorisation procedures. Further concerns are related, for example, to differences between 
Japanese Quality Management System (QMS) requ irements and the relevant international 
standard (ISO 13485).  The EU understands that, according to the Cabinet Decision of 10 July 
2012, the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welf are (MHLW) is to promulgate legislation 
specifically designed for medical devices, and separate them from pharmaceuticals. According 
to this Decision, MHLW shall, inter alia, consider ways to streamline and accelerate the 
approval of medical devices, and revise the QMS Ministerial Ordinance in order to further 
improve its harmonization to international standards.  
 
Q28: Could Japan indicate the state of play of  this new draft legislation awhen it will be 
notified to the WTO TBT Committee? 
 
RESPONSE: Amendment of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Law is under consideration. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 285 
 
 
 Follow up question : 
The EU is grateful for Japan's answer to Q28. 
However, the EU would like to ask Japan to pr ovide more details on the contents of this 
amendment, and indicate when a draft is expecte d to be made publicly available and notified to 
the WTO.  
RESPONSE:  The contents of the amendment of the PAL are currently under consideration; 
therefore it is difficult to provide the details and indicate the schedule ahead. 
 Page 88, para. 48 - 50  
The report informs that Japan is currently carryi ng out a postal reform, which mainly is directed 
to privatisation and streamlining the operations  of Japan Post, and its financial services. "The 
Japanese authorities explained that th e revised Postal Service Privatization Act had a provision to 
ensure equivalent conditions of competition betw een the Japan Post Group and operators offering 
similar services, and that the Government of Jap an intended to continuously ensure consistency 
with the WTO Agreements and ot her international agreements". 
 
Q69: Can Japan explain how it intends to ensure that no cross-subsidisation and spill-over of 
benefits takes place between universal servi ce of Japan Post and the express and courier 
services? Could the Japanese authorities confirm and explain the reason why the customs 
declaration value threshold is higher for EMS packages of Japan Post than for packages of 
private sector operators.  
RESPONSE: If Q69 refers to “the express and courier services” as Express Mail Service 
(EMS) of the international postal service, the answer is as follows:  
 - EMS is stipulated in the Universal Postal Convention as a part of the postal services, and 
Japan does not consider international courier ser vices provided by international express carriers 
to be a similar service.  With regard to customs clearance for internati onal postal items including EMS, in principle, 
Japan applies procedures to these items different  from the ones applied to general cargo for 
commercial use, since the majority of the inte rnational postal items have such features as 
containing small-lot goods for personal use unilaterally dispatched by senders.  
 However, in line with the similar approach u sed in other countries, Japan Customs adopts the 
Declaration and Taxation Method un der which importers must make declarations by themselves 
if the goods declaration value threshold ex ceeds 200,000 JPY, in the same manner as the 
declaration for general cargo.  This is because such declaration is expected to be sufficient, as most of the goods are supposed 
to be for commercial use or mail-order use and th e receivers are considered to be well aware of 
the contents and prices of the items. 
 
Follow-up questions: 
1) Could the Japanese authorities explain the reason why the custom s declaration value 
threshold is higher for EMS packages of Japan Post than for packages of private sector express and courier operators delivering pack ages of same character and value? 
 RESPONSE: After considering the UPU’s definition of  the EMS, with regard to customs 
clearance for international postal items including EMS, in principle, Japan applies procedures to 
these items different from the ones applied to general cargo for commercial use, since the 
majority of the international postal items have  such features as containing small-lot goods for 
personal use unilaterally dispatched by senders. WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 286 
 
 
 However, in line with the similar approach u sed in other countries, Japan Customs adopts the 
Declaration and Taxation Method un der which importers must make declarations by themselves 
if the goods declaration value threshold ex ceeds 200,000 JPY, in the same manner as the 
declaration for general cargo. 
 
This is because such declaration is expected to be sufficient, as most of the goods are supposed 
to be for commercial use or mail-order use and the receivers are considered to be well aware of the contents and prices of the items. 
 
THE UPU defines the EMS as follows:  premium end-to-end service for documents and 
merchandise with following usual features: 
 Acceptance at any post office or pick up from a customer's premises  
 Priority handling from acceptance to final delivery  
 End-to-end tracking  
 Signature at delivery  
 Delivery to addressee's premises 
2) Could Japan explain how the character of  the service differs from international express 
delivery (courier) services in its understanding ? 
 
RESPONSE: Taking into account the several factors including but not limited to the following 
facts, Japan does not consider the internati onal courier services provided by international 
express carriers as a similar service.    - Express Mail Service (EMS) is dispatched a nd delivered as a part of international postal 
services through cooperation among designate d operators under the Universal Postal 
Convention. On the contrary, international express delivery (courier) services are provided 
through the independent global networks whic h are established by international express 
providers themselves. 
   - The fact that different customs proce dures apply to each service in several countries 
indicates both services are recognized internationally as different services. 
 Q70: Could Japan explain the measures taken by  the authorities to address points raised by 
certain stakeholders with respect to the revision of the Postal Service Privatization? In 
particular, could Japan indicate: 
 (i) what measures were taken to prohibit cross-subsidization between the financial 
branches and the postal branch of Japan Post; 
 (ii) what measures are taken to en sure foreign financial service providers a 
non-discriminatory access to the post office network of Japan post;   (iii) why the new measures taken with respect  to Postal Service Privatization  exempt 
Japan Post financial entities from certain aspects of the Insurance Business and 
Banking Law, unlike other (forei gn) financial service suppliers.  
 
RESPONSE: (i) The financial branches and the postal br anch of Japan Post were divided into 
separate companies in 2007, in order to prevent cross-subsidization. The accounting systems of 
these companies are clearly separated. 
(ii) There has been no legal restriction on th e Japan Post Services Company (JPSC) to sell 
insurance products including those of foreign fina ncial institutions other than those of Japan 
Post Insurance (JPI) and Japan Post Bank (JPB). In fact, some insurance companies other than 
JPI have agency contracts with the JPSC to sell their insurance products through post offices. 
(iii) All the provisions of the Banking Act and the Insurance Business Ac t are fully applied for 
the JPB and the JPI respectively, as is the case with the other banks and insurance companies.   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 287 
 
 
 Therefore, we can say that no exception is made  for the JPB and JPI in the Banking Act and the 
Insurance Business Act. Additionally, pursuant to Articles 65 and 68 of the PSPA, Japan Post Holdings is currently 
exempt from the following regulations of the Banking Act and the Insurance Business Act: the 
Banking Act, in order to secure sound banki ng and insurance business, prohibits a banking 
holding company from holding subsidiaries other than certain types of banking-related companies and the Insurance Busi ness Act, for the same purpo se, requests insurance holding 
companies to get the Authorities’ approval to hol d subsidiaries other than certain types of 
insurance-related companies. 
 
This exception was established in the PSPA becau se JPH, which has a subsidiary of post 
services, cannot sell JPB and JPI shares immediately, while the PSPA demanded of the Government additional supervision over the JPB an d the JPI besides that set by the Banking Act 
and the Insurance Business Act.  
This exemption will end when JPH sells 50% of the shares of the JPB and JPI, as the JPH will 
then no longer be a holding company of the JPB and JPI.  
Note: In the Banking Act and the Insurance Busi ness Act, “holding” means to have a more than 
50% company share.  
 
Follow-up questions:  The EU understands that the Revised Law sets forth the scope of 
business operations to be performed by Japan Po st Company. In particular, these operations 
include “over-the-counter insurance business operations” which are limited to operations 
performed on behalf of Japan Post Insurance Company. Furthermore, Japan Post Company 
could provide other services including e.g. the distribution of products issued by other insurers 
but only to the extent that they do not hinder the execution of the over-the-counter insurance business operations for JPI.  
 
1) Can Japan explain how these provisions ensu re a level playing field regarding access to the 
network of Japan Post? 
 
2) Which body will determine and how will it be  determined that other operations such as 
distribution of products issued by other insurers do not hinder the execution of the over-the-counter insurance business operations for JPI? 
 
RESPONSE:  The answers for the questions are as follows: 
1) The Japan Post Company (JPC) is eligible to  make contracts with insurance companies other 
than the Japan Post Insurance (J PI), under their business decisions, without any restriction to the 
counterparties or conditions on the contract.  2) The JPC is obliged to provide “the ove r-the-counter insurance business operations” as 
universal services, but there is no legal restric tion which limits the counterparty of the contract 
to the JPI.  The JPC is able to provide services other th an “the over-the-counter insurance business 
operations” under their business decisions taking into consideration the services’ influence on 
the provision of universal services. 
 
3) Can Japan explain if the Insurance Busi ness Act and the Banking Act allow holding 
companies to perform financial operations such as  simple savings, money transfers, debt and 
credit settlement and easily accessi ble life insurance services?  
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 288 
 
 
 RESPONSE: 3) Insurance and banking holding companies may not conduct business other than 
managing the operations of their subsidiary in surance and banking companies and any other 
business incidental thereto. (Article 271-21-1 of  the Insurance Business Act and Article 52-21-1 
of the Banking Act)  4) Can Japan further clarify whether Japan Post Holding has the right to perform these operations?  
RESPONSE:  4) The Japan Post Holdings  is not allowed to perform  financial ope rations under 
the Postal Services Privatization Act and the Act on Japan Post Holdings Co. Ltd., which define 
the business scope of the Japan Post Holdings , and by the Banking Act/the Insurance Business 
Act, which prohibit banks/insurance compani es from conducting business other than banking 
business/insurance business and restrict the business scope of subsidiaries held by 
banks/insurance companies.  
cf. Article 61 of the Postal Services Privatiza tion Act, Article 4 of the Act on Japan Post 
Holdings Co. Ltd., (Act No.98 of 2005), Articl es 12 and 16-2 of the Banking Act (Act No.59 of 
1981) and Articles 100 and 106 of the Insurance Business Act(Act No.105 of 1995). 
 
(5) SERVICES 
(iii) Transport 
(b) Air transport  
Page 101, Para 82 
The report mentions that airports are all public ly owned and publicly managed, but a recently 
published document defining the medium-long term strategy for aviation mentions the possibility 
of establishing a concession regime and even privatization. A restructuration of the landing fees 
schedule is also envisaged, in order to give pref erence to small and medium-size aircraft, promote 
the development of low-cost carriers, and advance the open sky policy. 
 
Q78: Could Japan make clear what measures the Japanese Authorities intend to take to 
ensure non-discriminatory access to  major Japanese airports (Narita and Haneda), align the 
airport fees to the level applied in other major airports in the world an d avoid distortions of 
competition between airlines? 
 
RESPONSE: Slots at congested Japanese airports including Narita and Haneda airports are 
allocated according to IATA guidelines without discrimination. 
 
Follow-up question: 
Although Japan affirms that slots at Narita and Haneda airports are allocated a ccording to the 
IATA guidelines without discrimination, some EU airlines some EU carri ers have been denied 
access to day time slots at Haneda airport, wh ile others have been granted such slots. 
 
Could Japan spell out the measures the national co mpetent Authorities intend to apply in order to 
avert discriminatory access, in particular to Hane da airport, regarding EU airlines and specify 
the criteria that are applied? Besides, could J apan explain if any measures are foreseen to align 
the airport fees to the level applied in other major airports in the world and hence avoid 
distortions of competition between airlines? 
 
RESPONSE:  There is no discrimination at Hane da airport. No information about 
discrimination against EU carriers at Haneda ai rport has been reported. Japan does not have 
further specific measures to align the airport fees to  the level applied in other major airports in 
the world. 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 289 
 
 
 6 Indonesia  
 
Q1. In 2009 two institutions were established to pr ovide financial supports to companies that are 
deemed to have revitalization potential and highl y indebted, including those in manufacturing. 
Would Japan kindly provide furt her details of which companies are entitled to receive these 
financial supports, what the requirements are, and whether foreign companies in Japan ore 
Japanese companies located in other countries are also eligible in the scheme? 
 A.  
(ETIC) 
The ETIC was established in October 2009 by th e Act on the Enterprise Turnaround Initiative 
Corporation of Japan. Its mission is to s upport the rehabilitation of solid middle-sized 
companies, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and others burdened by excess debt but that have valuable business resources. Larg e-scale businesses were basically excluded from 
eligibility for ETIC support after the revision of the ETIC Act in March 2012. The ETIC was 
established as a temporary organization to overcome difficult circumstances for local economies 
and provide support on a short-term basis.  The ETIC has provided wide-ranging support for business rehabilitation, using such means as consultations, promoting the drawing-up of bu siness rehabilitation plans, making arrangements 
between businesses and creditors about restructur ing liabilities, offering financial support, and 
providing specialized personnel. The financia l support includes purchasing debts directly, 
conducting capital injections, loan financi ng and debt guarantee for borrowing money. 
 The ETIC’s paid-in capital comprises invest ments from the Japanese government and those 
from private-sector financial institutions. Funds for the ETIC’s business operations are procured 
from the market through government-guaranteed borrowing.  As a basic principle, in cases where creditors are re quested to forgive debt or take similar action 
in the course of business revitalization, management and shareholders of the company concerned must accept corresponding responsibility. 
 
(INCJ) The INCJ provides basic financial support through investment. There are no limitations on its investment in terms of sector. Until now, the INCJ has invested in various ar eas such as materials, chemicals, electronic 
devices, industrial machinery, energy, transporta tion, automobiles, cons umer goods, retail, life 
sciences, IT, business services, contents and infrastructure.  WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 290 
 
 
 7 Norway 
 
Q1. For instance, Norwegian exporters of maritime  equipment have indicated that shipyards and 
ship owners have a preference for Japanese produc ts when contracting and building ships. Let 
me take this opportunity to encourage the Govern ment of Japan to reconsider or dismantle any 
measures that may in effect hinder or discourage shipyards and ship owners from buying foreign 
maritime equipment.  A. The Japanese government does not take any policy measures to hinder or discourage 
shipyards and ship owners from buying foreign maritime equipment.    WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 291 
 
 
 RESPONSES TO CHINA'S QUESTIONS 
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 292 
 
 
 
   WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
  Page 293 
 
 
 
 
 WT/TPR/M/276/Add.1 
Page 294 
 
 
 
 
__________