Note : This document has been translated from Japanese original document.

Evaluation on Transparency and Fairness of Specified Digital Platforms(General online shopping malls and app stores)
December 22, 2022
Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry
I. Introduction
This evaluation is conducted by the Minister of METI in accordance with Article 9, Paragraph 2 of the Act on
Improving Transparency and Fairness of Digital Platforms (Act No. 38 of 2020; hereinafter referred to as the"TFDPA" or the "Act").
The specified digital platforms reviewed in this evaluation are as follows.
Business
category
General online
shopping malls

1

App stores

2

Specified digitalplatform
Amazon.co.jp

Amazon Japan G.K. (hereinafter referred to as "Amazon")

Rakuten Ichiba

Rakuten Group, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Rakuten")

Yahoo! Shopping

Yahoo Japan Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Yahoo")

App Store

Apple Inc. and iTunes K.K. (hereinafter referred to as "Apple")

Google Play Store

Google LLC (hereinafter referred to as "Google")

Specified digital platform providers

In conducting this evaluation, we reviewed the contents of the periodic reports for FY2021 submitted by
specified digital platform providers, information provided to the Digital Platform Consultation Desk,3 and theresults of the questionnaire survey. In addition, through the "Monitoring Meeting on the Transparency and Fairness
of Digital Platforms" (Chaired by Okada Yosuke, Professor, Graduate School of Economics, Hitotsubashi
University; hereinafter referred to as the "Monitoring Meeting")4, the opinions of academic experts and otherrelevant parties were heard.
In addition, in conducting the evaluation, we took into account the "Fundamental Approach" in the guideline
established by the Minister of METI (Article 9, Paragraph 2 of the Act). The " Fundamental Approach" indicates5

the direction of efforts expected of specified digital platform providers based on the purpose of the co-regulation,and its main points can be summarized as follows.
・ When taking actions that affect businesses that use specified digital platforms (hereinafter referred to as"business users"), such as changing the terms and conditions under which the specified digital platforms areprovided, take into account the impact on the business users in advance, and respond appropriately (e.g.,
explanation of contents and reasons that are easy to understand from the viewpoint of business users,
1Refers to the business category specified in the middle column of Item 1 of the table in Paragraph 1 of the Cabinet Orderfor Stipulating the Business Category and Scale under in Article 4, Paragraph 1 of the TFDPA (Cabinet Order No. 17 of
2021; hereinafter referred to as the "Order"). The same applies hereinafter.
2Refers to the business category specified in the middle column of Item 2 of the table in Paragraph 1 of the Order. The
same applies hereinafter.
3https://www.meti.go.jp/policy/mono_info_service/digitalplatform/business.html
4https://www.meti.go.jp/press/2021/12/20211221001/20211221001.html (in Japanese);https://www.meti.go.jp/english/press/2021/1221_003.html (in English)
5Refers to the Guidelines on Measures to be Taken by Specified Digital Platform Providers to Promote Mutual
Understanding in Transactional Relationships with Users Providers of Products, etc. (METI Notification No. 16 of 2021).
The same applies hereinafter.

1

notification with sufficient time, consistent and impartial judgments, etc.).
・ Listen carefully to complaints, consultations, and objections from business users and respond appropriately.
・ Establish a system that leads to operational improvements, and strive to continuously improve operations.
In this evaluation, in light of the above perspectives and taking into account the opinions of the experts at theMonitoring Meeting, the direction of efforts expected of the specified digital platform providers is indicated, andinitiatives that can be evaluated in light of the said direction are listed.
The following three directions (possible options) for response based on this evaluation are listed below.
(1) Voluntary operational improvements by specified digital platform providers
Under the TFDPA, specified digital platform providers must strive to voluntarily improve the transparency
and fairness of their specified digital platforms based on the results of the published evaluation (Article 9,
Paragraph 6 of the Act). Specified digital platform providers are expected to voluntarily and proactively
improve their operations based on this evaluation. In doing so, reference may be made to the evaluable
initiatives listed in this evaluation.
(2) Revision of "guidelines" for voluntary procedures and system development
The guidelines established by the Minister of METI are scheduled to be reviewed on a constant basis. The
revision of the guidelines may be considered in the future, taking into account changes in economic and social
conditions and the status of voluntary efforts by specified digital platform providers.
(3) Consideration of enforceable intervention measures
In the future, if there are some cases that are difficult to deal with in the framework of the TFDPA orexisting laws and regulations, enforceable intervention measures may be considered.
In addition, Appendix 1 of this evaluation summarizes the status of the processing of individual cases related to
the TFDPA. The purpose of this information is to increase transparency in the operation of the TFDPA and to leadto compliance with the TFDPA and voluntary efforts by specified digital platform providers.

II. Evaluation (*see Appendix 2 for details)
This evaluation is in two parts.
First, "1. Status of fulfillment of obligations under the TFDPA" is an evaluation based on the periodic reports for
FY2021 submitted by the companies and other information.
"2. Major issues and expected direction of initiatives in the online mall and app store sectors" shows the
expected direction of efforts from the viewpoint of improving transparency and fairness, after confirming the statusof efforts by specified digital platform providers with regard to the relatively large number of comments6 received
from business users at the Digital Platform Consultation Desk, etc. and those that could affect a large number ofbusiness users.

6It should be noted that complaints may include those based on misunderstanding or lack of awareness of the terms andconditions, etc.

2

In addition, details including information provided by the specified digital platform providers (factual
information to be evaluated) are compiled as Appendix 2.
1. Status of fulfillment of obligations under the TFDPA
It can be evaluated that the disclosure of information such as terms and conditions of provision by specified
digital platform providers has generally improved as a result of the implementation of the TFDPA. The specified
digital platform providers also showed a positive attitude toward the development of a system for handlingcomplaints and resolving disputes. In fact, according to the results of a survey of business users7, about 70-80% of
the business users indicated that the information disclosure and consultation services provided by the specified
digital platform providers have become more understandable and courteous.
On the other hand, in light of the feedback from business users, the opinions of experts at the Monitoring
Meetings, and the guidelines set by the Minister of METI, further efforts are expected from the specified digitalplatform providers as follows.
(1) Disclosure of information on terms and conditions of provision, etc.
The TFDPA requires specified digital platform providers to disclose certain matters as terms and conditions ofprovision and, in disclosing the terms and conditions of provision including such matters, to describe them inJapanese using clear and plain expressions and to make them readily accessible for reference at any time (Article 5,
Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the Act and Article 5 of the Ministerial Ordinance8). This is expected to improve theunderstanding of the terms and conditions of provision by the business users and increase the predictability of theirbusiness. In order to realize such effects, if the terms of use, etc., which describe the terms and conditions ofprovision, are voluminous, efforts and innovations are required to disclose them in an easy-to-understandmanner so that important information for business users will not be buried in the terms and conditions.
The TFDPA requires that, in principle, when changing the terms and conditions of provision, a specified digitalplatform provider must disclose the details of and reasons for the change in advance with a period of time torespond to such change (Article 5, Paragraph 4, Item 1 of the Act). This allows the business user a preparation
period to respond to changes in the terms and conditions of provision. In addition, the reason for the change will be
disclosed, which is expected to have the effect of making it easier to offer consultation if necessary.
Regarding the advance notification period for changes to the terms and conditions, according to the results of aquestionnaire survey of business users9, approximately 60-80% of respondents indicated that they were notified
three months or more in advance, and 80-90% when combined with those who indicated that they were notified
one month or more in advance, indicating a certain level of efforts to address the issue. On the other hand, in somecases, some business users have commented that the time period for responding to changes is insufficient.
At Apple, there was a case of giving 15 days' notice of a change in the App Store pricing table (Tier) price.10
When making changes to the terms and conditions of provision, etc., it is necessary to provide a sufficient
preparation period, taking into consideration the circumstances of the business user, and to explain the
7March 14, 2022 2nd Monitoring Meeting [Ref. 1] Page 15 of “the Results of Questionnaire Survey for Digital Platform

Business Users" (hereinafter "2nd Monitoring Meeting [Ref. 1]").
8Refers to the Ordinance for Enforcement of the TFDA (METI Ordinance No. 1 of 2021). The same applies hereinafter.
9See the page 20 of the 2nd Monitoring Meeting [Ref.1].
10Subsequently (on December 7, 2022), Apple announced that it would take measures to make the App Store pricing tables(Tier) more flexible for price setting by business users. This would also allow business users to avoid the impact of Tier
price changes due to exchange rate fluctuations by Apple, if they choose, and eliminate the need for work to respond tosuch changes.

3details and reasons for the changes in an easy-to-understand manner. In addition to this, it is also necessary
to make the process of dialogue with business users more effective. From these perspectives, we will closely
monitor each company's response to changes in terms and conditions of provision.
The following initiatives can be evaluated as desirable efforts in light of the above-mentioned objectives.
<Efforts and innovations for disclosing the terms and conditions of provision and changes in the terms and conditions ofprovision in an easy-to-understand manner>
・ Released web pages that list or consolidate and briefly explain disclosures made under the TFDPA to the public(Rakuten, Yahoo)
・ Provided explanations at events for users when making changes that have a large impact on business users (Rakuten)
・ Provided an old/new comparison of the changes (Yahoo)・ Released a Japanese-language video explaining the new policy changes (Google)<When reasonable opinions are received from business users regarding changes in terms and conditions of provision, such
opinions will be taken into consideration>

・ Conducted preliminary interviews with the most affected business users (Yahoo)(2) Establish procedures and systems to promote mutual understanding
The TFDPA obliges specified digital platform providers to take necessary measures to promote mutual
understanding in business relationships with business users (Article 7, Paragraph 1 of the Act). In order tocontribute to the appropriate and effective implementation of such measures, guidelines have been established by
the Minister of METI (Article 7, Paragraph 2 of the Act), and specified digital platform providers are required to
explain in their periodic reports the specific measures they have taken to realize the desirable direction of efforts
indicated in the "Fundamental Approach " of the said guidelines. (Article 9, Paragraph 1, Item 4 of the Act).
In the first periodic report submitted after the TFDPA went into effect, a number of initiatives were reported byeach company, but the actual operation and effectiveness of these initiatives were not clear in many cases.
In order for specified digital platform providers to secure the trust of business users and society as awhole, it is important to explain their initiatives in a way that can be verified externally. For this purpose, inthe next periodic report and external explanations, etc., we expect the following:i) Present the effectiveness of various efforts, including quantitative results, specific examples of how issues
were addressed, and measures to effectively promote improvements, with evidence from internal
audits, etc.;ii) Explain not only the improvement measures already implemented but also the items considered current
issues and future action plans, thereby demonstrating a stance of voluntary and proactive
improvement of operations.
In doing so, it is expected that the domestic managers, who are responsible for communicating with all parties
concerned including business users, will play a central role in improving the operation.
The following initiatives can be evaluated as desirable efforts in light of the above-mentioned objectives.
＜Explanation of procedures and systems for effective improvement of operations and specific examples of improvement
measures taken>
・ Set various indicators and targets for the accuracy of each measure, such as suspending listings, and monitor and4periodically scrutinize their progress, identify specific measures for improvement, set specific targets for those in chargeof each improvement measure, and manage progress. In addition, an independent team conducts regular audits of theactions and decisions of the team implementing actions such as suspending listings (Amazon)
・ Regularly hold meetings to hear opinions from outside experts, and publish summaries of the meetings, opinions of theexperts, and improvement activities based on the opinions on the portal site for business users (Rakuten)
・ Explained specific details of improvements based on internal audit findings (that a system and mechanism to handle andresolve complaints comprehensively, appropriately, and promptly is needed) (Yahoo)
・ As specific examples of how feedback from business users have led to operational improvements, Google explained
how it consulted with a Japanese user group that provides online crane game apps regarding changes to the "Google
Play Policy on Cash Gambling, Games, and Contests" and introduced a certification system and monitoring system as apilot program to enable the continued distribution of such apps. Google also explained that the policy on authorship innews apps was updated based on feedback from Japanese news organizations (Google)
・ As a specific example of how user opinions were linked to operational improvements, an example of updating
guidelines for describing app metadata based on feedback from business users was explained (Apple)<Explanation of current issues and future policy>
・ Presented a specific policy, stating that "maintaining transparency when giving preferential treatment to our own groupcompany store" is a future issue (Yahoo)・ Presented a specific policy for "Notice Regarding Temporary Suspension of Account" as an issue for the future (Google)(3) Status of complaint handling and dispute resolution
The TFDPA requires the establishment of procedures and systems necessary for handling complaints andresolving disputes from business users as part of the establishment of procedures and systems to promote mutual
understanding with business users (Article 7, Paragraph 3, Item 3 of the Act), and the specified digital platform
providers are required to report the number of complaints and disputes, major types, and average processing period
in periodic reports (Article 9, Paragraph 1, Item 2 of the Act, Article 13, Paragraph 2 of the Ministerial Ordinance).
Through the periodic reports for FY2021, etc., various information was provided by specified digital platform
providers on their procedures and systems for complaint handling and dispute resolution, as well as theirperformance (see Appendix 3). Such information disclosure will enable objective evaluation of each company's
efforts, and will contribute to gaining a sense of acceptance and trust from business users and society as a whole.
We expect specified digital platform providers to proactively disclose information that contributes to an
objective evaluation of their efforts in complaint handling and dispute resolution.
Regarding complaint handling and dispute resolution by specified digital platform providers, business users
have voiced comments such as, "Responses to inquiries are canned and problems are not resolved," "Insufficient
communication when a problem arises does not lead to a resolution," "There are some cases where the Japanese
language is not used to communicate properly", etc.
Specific methods for handling complaints and resolving disputes are to be implemented by each company
with originality and ingenuity based on its actual business operations including the number of business users using
the services, while ongoing efforts are required to improve responses considering the feedback from business
users. On an individual basis, the following efforts are expected.
・ [Amazon]: It was explained that, in preparing and using communication plans and notification letters withbusiness users in advance, the opinions of business users regarding the quality of communication are regularly
scrutinized, and the prescribed plans and letters are being improved, but in light of the feedback from business5

users, it is possible that the responses using the prescribed plans and notification text may have led tothe above-mentioned comments from business users, and we expect the company to continue its efforts
to improve the quality of communication with business users in the future.
・ [Apple]: It was explained that complaints received on the complaint form established with theimplementation of the TFDPA are reviewed, investigated, and evaluated by a cross-functional team consistingof various experienced, highly trained, and designated experts, and that the results of the review are answeredindividually, but in light of the low number of complaints and the comments from business users, it ispossible that the above complaint form is not fully recognized by business users, and we expect efforts
to increase awareness among business users.
In resolving disputes with business users, it may be effective to involve a third party. For example, if there is adispute over measures taken by a specified digital platform provider, such as account suspension measures, andsufficient information cannot be disclosed to the business user due to security measures or other circumstances, it
may be difficult to objectively confirm the appropriateness of such measures. In such cases, it would be highly
appreciated if measures such as the use of ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution), etc., at the request of thebusiness user and reasonable cost-sharing for dispute resolution are considered.
The following initiatives can be evaluated as desirable efforts in light of the above-mentioned objectives.
・ Explanation of the percentage of complaints from business users that were ultimately resolved in accordance with thewishes of the business users (approximately 74%) (Amazon)・ Explanation of the percentage of complaints and disputes from business users that resulted in Google's judgment being
maintained, etc. (approximately 25%) (Google)
・ Explanation of the results of a survey conducted at the help desk (85% of respondents indicated that they were satisfied)(Yahoo)・ Explanation of the number of opinions received from business users and the number of cases in which functional
improvements were made, and visualization of the results to business users (Yahoo)・ Detailed and specific explanation of the results and reasons for the handling of all three grievances filed (Apple)
・ Establish a close relationship with the Japan Direct Marketing Association (JADMA), to which METI outsources theoperation of the Digital Platform Consultation Desk (for online mall users), and when JADMA points out issues with
Amazon, promptly work with the relevant departments to identify the cause and promote implementation of remedial
measures, etc.(Amazon)
・ Establish a new communication channel with Mobile Content Forum (MCF), an industry association of mobile
developers to which METI has entrusted the operation of the Digital Platform Consultation Desk (for app store business
users), to exchange views with business user groups (Google)

2. Major issues and expected direction of initiatives in the online mall and app store sector(1) App store fees and billing methods
App store fees have become an extremely important concern for businesses that provide digital services formobile devices for a fee, influencing business feasibility decisions and future investments, and many have pointed
out issues regarding the level of fees and how they should be charged. Internationally, there have been various
developments, such as lawsuits, competition law enforcement, and institutional reforms, assuming that there could
be competition problems.
6

At the Monitoring Meeting, Apple and Google, which operate app stores, provided various explanations,
including the positioning of their fees (that it is an app store usage fee, not a settlement fee). This point iscommendable as a first step toward mutual understanding with business users. In addition, while it has been
pointed out that, in practice, only payment methods designated by Apple and Google can be used for billing,
Google has applied its User Choice Billing pilot program not only to countries and regions where it is required bylaw, but also to Japan, and announced its policy to increase billing method options on a trial basis for applications
other than game applications, which can be evaluated as an example of initiatives based on user feedback.
However, there is a growing realization that expanding payment options alone will not necessarily encourage
competition for app store fees. It is difficult to recognize that there is sufficient competition in terms of fees, andthere are also questions as to whether fair competition between users and Apple will be distorted by whether or notfees are paid, and whether the distinction between apps with 15% to 30% fees and those without fees is reasonable,
and in this situation, it cannot be said that the situation has yet to be understood and accepted by the business users.
We expect Apple and Google to continue to work toward mutual understanding with business users, forexample, by explaining in detail the relationship between costs and fees related to app store operations andhow costs should be borne, and by promoting discussions with organizations consisting of business users. In
addition, with regard to the rule changes regarding payment methods, it is important that they are actuallyused by business users, and we will closely monitor future trends, including evaluations from business users.
(2) Preferential treatment of the company and its affiliates
On the specified digital platforms, where the specified digital platform providers themselves or their affiliates
offer and sell products and apps, business users have voiced concerns that the specified digital platform providers
may be favoring their own companies or affiliates in taking action against violations, in the display ranking ofproducts and apps, and in the use of data regarding the business activities of the business users. Internationally,
there have been various discussions and examinations of in-house preferential practices by major digital platforms
as a possible competition issue.
At the Monitoring Meeting, each company explained the existence or otherwise of its own preferential practices.
This point is commendable as a first step toward mutual understanding with business users. For example, Rakuten
explained that it would not take any special measures, such as temporary suspension of services or rejection of allservices (account suspension, etc.), on the grounds that the stores were operated by Rakuten, and as a circumstance
supporting this policy, they explained that there is no significant difference between stores operated by thecompany or its affiliates and other stores, regarding the percentage of the stores where violations were pointed out.
Yahoo has voluntarily and proactively taken steps to improve the transparency and fairness of preferential
treatment of its group company stores, including disclosing that it may give preferential treatment to its groupcompany stores in product labeling and other situations, voluntarily establishing and announcing a management
policy regarding conflicts of interest and preferential treatment of its group companies, and subjecting preferential
treatment of its group companies to internal audit. Furthermore, Yahoo's intention to review its own groupcompany store preferential treatment tirelessly after explaining future issues is highly commendable.
Some of their own preferential acts may be justified, while others may be evaluated as problematic from thestandpoint of fairness and impartiality, but it is important for specified digital platform providers to dispel theconcerns of not only business users but also of society, including experts, since they are entities that are7highly required to enhance the transparency and fairness of their operations. We expect each company todisclose information and establish a system so that enables objective verification of whether or not it and its
affiliates receive preferential treatment and, if so, the legitimacy of such treatment, and then to explain thoseefforts.
(3) Procedures for account suspension and app deletion
The TFDPA requires that, in principle, 30 days prior to taking measures such as account suspension (refusal of
all transactions), the contents and reasons for such measures must be notified (Article 5, Paragraph 4, Item 2 of theAct). This is expected to make it easier for business users to review their operations or offer consultations asnecessary, since they will know the reasons for the measures in advance.
However, some business users have commented that they do not know how to respond because there is no
explanation as to why their accounts were suspended, or that their accounts were suspended because of theirassociation with the offending account, but it is difficult to prove that there is no association. This may be due toinsufficient explanation of the reason or difficulty in providing detailed notification of the reason due to security orother factors. The TFDPA also does not impose the obligation to give notice of reasons, etc. in certain exceptional
cases, such as when it harms the legitimate interests of consumers, etc. (Article 5, Paragraph 4, Item 4, proviso of
the Act, Article 11, Paragraph 2 of the Ministerial Ordinance).
While account suspension measures and the associated withholding of sales proceeds may be necessary toprotect the interests of consumers, etc., they are actions that seriously affect the business activities of the business
users. Specified digital platform providers are required to ensure proper processes and continuously
improve their responses while balancing the protection of the interests of consumers and others when taking
measures such as account suspension.
Specifically, the following actions are required.
i) The necessity and reasonableness of account suspension measures should be carefully determined. In
particular, when taking immediate action to suspend accounts without prior notice, it is necessary tocarefully determine whether the action falls under any of the exceptions under the TFDPA, including
the necessity and reasonableness of such action.
ii) When taking measures to suspend accounts, in principle, specific reasons are required to be disclosed inadvance to the extent that the business user can substantially file an objection.
iii) If it is found that the account suspension was taken in error through an objection from the business user,
etc., it is expected that efforts will be made to give full consideration to the interests of the business
user, such as promptly restoring the account and considering whether or not compensation isnecessary. In particular, it is important to consider how to provide after-the-fact remedial measures, suchas enhancing the compensation mechanism, in light of the fact that, in cases where individual accountsuspension measures are automatically implemented using AI or other means, a certain percentage ofwrong decisions may be made, resulting in disadvantages to a large number of users.
On an individual basis, the following responses are expected.
・ [Amazon]: In light of the opinions of business users using the service, to make efforts to communicate
carefully with business users using the service, such as explaining the reasons for its decision to theextent that business users are able to file objections substantively, while giving consideration tosecurity and other circumstances, even if this is an emergency response to protect the interests ofconsumers and other parties.
8In addition to the above, we expect the number of objections to account suspensions and examples of suchobjections to be explained so that the appropriateness of account suspensions can be verified externally. In
addition, it would be highly appreciated if measures such as the use of ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) at therequest of business users, and a study on how reasonable costs for dispute resolution should be borne. Similarly,
when taking action against violations, the company is required to ensure due process and fairness, as well as tocontinuously improve its response.
The following initiatives can be evaluated as desirable efforts in light of the above-mentioned objectives.
・ When suspending accounts, fair and careful consideration is given by a council of relevant departments in accordancewith the prescribed internal flow (Rakuten)
・ In cases where it is not possible to determine from the web page whether or not the product or act is a prohibited, thecompany will make a careful judgment, such as asking the business user to submit a written response and confirming thefacts before determining that the act is a violation (Rakuten)

・ By improving the messaging of graduated violation warnings, the number of objections related to not understanding thereason for account suspension has been reduced by 70%. Also, an 18% reduction in objections related tomisunderstandings of the reasons for account suspensions by updating the notice to make it easier for business users tounderstand the meaning in situations where they suspend accounts associated with the offending account (Google)
・ When expelling a vendor, an email indicating not only the relevant provisions of the guidelines, etc., but also the specificconduct that is problematic and the reasons why it is problematic, the date of the violation, etc is sent. (Yahoo)・ Present samples of notification letters for contract termination, expelling the vendor, or account suspension actions(Rakuten, Yahoo, Apple)

If an app provided on an app store is removed from the store, not only the business users that provides the app
but also existing users of the app may be affected. It would be highly appreciated if Apple and Google voluntarily
provide advance notice of app deletion in certain cases, such as when the degree of policy violation or the impact
on users is minor, so that business users can take corrective action before apps are deleted.
(4) Handling of returns and refunds
In some cases, the specified digital platform providers, rather than the relevant business users, may be
responsible for setting return/refund conditions and making individual return/refund decisions for products, etc.
provided by the business users, but business users have voiced their dissatisfaction with the handling of cases inwhich a specified digital platform provider accepts returns and refunds without sufficient fact-checking, and withthe handling of cases in which a purchaser has switched returned merchandise.
At the Monitoring Meeting, the companies explained the conditions for returns and refunds and their individual
decisions on accepting returns and refunds, and it was found that at Rakuten Ichiba and Yahoo! Shopping, these
conditions are left to the discretion of the business users. On the other hand, at Amazon.co.jp, the App Store, andGoogle Play Store, Amazon, Apple, or Google may set conditions and make decisions regarding individual returns
and refunds for products and other goods provided by business users, and this is considered to be a situation wherecomplaints from business users are likely to arise.

9

We expect Amazon, Apple, and Google to take measures to improve business users' understanding andbusiness predictability, such as by proactively providing easy-to-understand explanations to business usersof their policies and initiatives regarding returns and refunds, and publicly announcing and explaining
certain information regarding their return and refund records, and to enhance the process for filingobjections.
On an individual basis, the following responses are expected.
・ [Amazon]: In light of the feedback from business users, we expect the following initiatives in the future.
i) Publicly announce and explain that the return conditions set by Amazon (including campaigns
that are temporarily applied only to products for which the Fulfillment by Amazon service11
is used by the business users) have been appropriately set, taking into consideration theimpact on the business users and other factors in advance.
ii) Actively provide easy-to-understand explanations of individual return decisions, return
information, and efforts related to objections, and promote the understanding of business users.
iii) In the event that an objection is raised by a business user regarding Amazon's decision to return aproduct, to communicate sufficiently with the business user to ensure an appropriate resolutionin accordance with the individual case.
iv) Publicize and explain efforts related to compensation for returned goods, including an overview
of the compensation system for returned goods, the thinking behind the level of compensation, andthe actual results of compensation.
・ [Apple]: In light of the feedback from business users, considering the fact that Apple has set a relatively
long period of "60 days" as a general rule to accept refund requests from users, we expect Apple tofurther promote efforts to prevent users from being unfairly disadvantaged, such as by enhancing
explanatory responses and objection processes. For example, efforts to provide various tools, etc. thatenable business users to obtain information on refunds (status of refunds, history of in-app purchases
refunded by apps for customers, history of end users' in-app purchases, subscription status, consumption
information, etc.) are commendable, and we expect that these efforts are proactively explained tobusiness users in an easily understood manner, and will be improved while verifying their use.
(5) Factors determining the display ranking of products and apps, predictability of app reviews
The display ranking of products and apps has a significant impact on sales of products, etc., and is of greatinterest to business users. The TFDPA requires specified digital platform providers to disclose key matters that
determine the order in which products and other items are displayed (Article 5, Paragraph 2, Item 1(c) of the Act),and certain information has been disclosed by each company. In this respect, Yahoo is highly commendable for its
efforts to help users better understand the "Recommended Order" by explaining in detail how the main items that
determine the display order were extracted, and by itemizing them in a way that is as consistent as possible with
the numerical values, etc. available to users.
We will continue to closely monitor how to ensure transparency and fairness in the display ranking ofproducts and applications, including addressing concerns regarding preferential treatment of our own andaffiliated companies.

11Refers to a fee-based optional service in which Amazon stores and ships inventory and performs customer service

operations on behalf of the business user.

10While some business users have pointed out certain improvements in the app review procedures and system,others have pointed out issues regarding its predictability, fairness, and impartiality. Where the predictability of app
reviews affects the business activities and investment decisions of business users, we expect Apple and Google tocontinuously work toward improving the app review process while maintaining dialogue with business
users.

III. Conclusion ~Toward Voluntary and Proactive Operational Improvement~
Digital platforms are bearers of innovation and bring a variety of benefits, such as providing SMEs and otherswith opportunities to develop new customers at home and abroad. On the other hand, the more businesses andconsumers use a digital platform, the more convenient it becomes, which is characterized by a significant "network
effect," and this tends to create a monopoly or oligopoly, and small and medium-sized businesses are forced to usesome of the digital platforms.
In this regard, the TFDPA, from the perspective of striking a balance between innovation and discipline, is basedon the voluntary and proactive efforts of digital platform providers, rather than the traditional regulatory approach
where the government imposes uniform and strict rules of conduct on providers, and it adopts the mechanism thatthe government will continuously evaluate the operation of specified digital platforms by listening to the opinions
of experts as well as user businesses and consumers, and publish the results of the evaluation to encourage
specified digital platform providers to voluntarily improve their operations. This process of "Monitoring Review"is the core of "co-regulation," in which the government provides major direction while leaving a certain degree of
autonomy to the voluntary efforts of operators to achieve the objectives of regulation, and thus plays an extremely
important role from the perspective of ensuring the effectiveness of the TFDPA.
In light of the purpose and objectives of the Monitoring Review described above, providers of specified digitalplatforms are required to voluntarily and proactively improve the operation of their specified digital platforms
based on this evaluation, and to ensure the trust of business users and society as a whole by providing a solid
explanation of the effectiveness of their efforts. METI will closely monitor the status of efforts by each company
and review the direction of expected efforts through revisions of the guidelines. In addition, for those cases that are
difficult to deal with under the framework of the TFDPA, which is based on voluntary efforts, and existing laws
and regulations, it is conceivable to consider enforceable intervention measures in cooperation with relevant
ministries and agencies, while referring to international trends.

11