Silviase/jgov_v1.4_full_ann huggingface dataset:
In order for local governments to provide administrative services in response to local needs with responsibility and at their own discretion, it is necessary to build a local tax system in which the uneven distribution of tax sources is limited and the stability of tax revenue is ensured.

Index of Per Capita Revenue in Local Tax Revenue (with national average as 100)

FY2008settle amount	Local taxes total	Individual resident's tax	Two corporate taxes	Local consumption tax (post settlement)
¥38.9 trillion	¥12.3 trillion	¥8.4 trillion	¥2.5 trillion
Hokkaido	77.6	74.9	54.0	105.9
Aomori	66.3	60.1	47.9	98.0
Iwate	68.7	63.4	50.9	93.8
Miyagi	86.1	80.4	77.3	99.0
Akita	65.4	59.8	48.4	94.1
Yamagata	72.1	66.2	55.0	94.5
Fukushima	82.4	69.6	74.4	94.6
Ibaraki	94.0	89.2	91.0	91.7
Tochigi	99.4	89.8	93.3	98.6
Gunma	91.5	85.2	77.7	97.0
Saitama	89.1	110.0	61.4	81.2
Chiba	92.7	114.1	65.5	86.5
Tokyo	176.4	165.9	265.6	140.6
Kanagawa	107.9	134.3	84.4	92.1
Niigata	83.8	75.1	71.6	97.4
Toyama	91.2	89.7	75.1	97.8
Ishikawa	95.3	88.7	87.4	99.8
Fukui	97.9	86.5	94.5	98.3
Yamanashi	94.1	84.4	102.6	100.4
Nagano	86.4	83.3	68.3	103.1
Gifu	89.5	90.0	72.1	94.9
Shizuoka	106.6	102.2	104.6	102.7
Aichi	126.4	120.0	154.4	106.9
Mie	99.2	93.5	94.2	95.0
Shiga	97.6	95.4	102.6	83.2
Kyoto	97.6	96.0	103.1	104.0
Osaka	106.5	97.0	120.0	106.7
Hyogo	93.8	100.8	74.8	91.6
Nara	73.6	96.6	40.1	76.1
Wakayama	76.7	71.3	69.4	84.5
Tottori	70.6	67.2	53.7	96.9
Shimane	71.1	68.8	59.6	92.0
Okayama	89.9	82.7	85.3	93.9
Hiroshima	97.1	94.3	96.2	98.4
Yamaguchi	87.4	81.5	83.1	91.7
Tokushima	79.3	72.9	66.9	91.1
Kagawa	86.1	82.4	84.1	102.9
Ehime	76.1	70.0	71.0	89.7
Kochi	65.6	66.3	42.1	94.5
Fukuoka	85.4	83.0	75.6	97.9
Saga	74.4	65.6	69.9	90.4
Nagasaki	64.7	65.3	46.3	91.1
Kumamoto	68.4	65.8	52.0	93.8
Oita	76.2	69.1	59.1	99.2
Miyazaki	66.3	61.4	50.6	89.9
Kagoshima	65.1	61.8	45.1	88.6
Okinawa	58.4	54.4	45.3	76.0
National Average	100.0	100.0	100.0	100.0

1. The local tax revenue total amounts do not include excess taxation, non-statutory ordinary taxes, or non-statutory special purpose taxes.

2. The revenue of the individual resident's tax is the total of the prefectural individual resident's tax (taxation on per capita basis and taxation on income basis) and the municipal individual resident's tax (taxation on per capita basis and taxation on income basis) and excludes excess taxation.

3. The revenue of the two corporate taxes is the total of the corporate prefectural resident's tax, the corporate municipal resident's tax, and the corporate business tax, and excludes excess taxation.

4. Calculations are made from the basic residents' register population as of March 31, 2009.
## Local Allocation Tax

From the perspective of local autonomy, it would be the ideal for each local government to ensure the revenue sources necessary for administrative activities through local tax revenue collected from their residents. However, there are regional imbalances in tax revenue, and many local governments are unable to acquire necessary tax revenue. Therefore, the central government collects financial resources that should fundamentally be attributable to local tax revenue through national taxation and reallocates them as the local allocation tax to local governments where financial resources are insufficient.

## 1 Determining the total amount of local allocation tax

The total amount of the local allocation tax is determined on the basis of certain ratios for national taxes (32% for income tax and liquor tax, 34% for corporate tax, 29.5% for consumption tax, and 25% for tobacco tax) as well as estimates of standard revenue and expenditure of local public finance as a whole.

The total amount of local allocation tax in fiscal 2008 was ¥15,406.1 billion, up 1.3% from the previous fiscal year.

## 2 How regular local allocation taxes are calculated for each local government

The regular local allocation tax for each local government is calculated using the following structure:
## 3 Function of the local allocation tax

The function of the local allocation tax is to adjust imbalances in revenue among local governments in order to guarantee revenue so that local governments can provide standard administrative services and basic social infrastructure to their residents in whatever region.

Accordingly, as a result of the revenue adjustment mechanism through the local allocation tax, few differences in such factors as size of population have been found in the ratio of general revenue resources to total revenue.

## ● Ratio of General Revenue Resources to Total Revenue for Municipalities

A “midsize city” refers to a city with a population of more than 100,000 persons among cities excluding Government ordinance-designed major cities, core cities, and special cities, and a “small city” refers to a city with a population of less than 100,000.
## Expenditures

## What are taxes spent on?

## Expenses by Function

When expenses are classified by function, we see that a lot of revenue is expended for such items as public welfare expenses, education expenses, and civil engineering work expenses. In prefectures it is mainly expended for education expenses, debt servicing, and civil engineering work expenses, in that order. In municipalities it is primarily expended for public welfare expenses, civil engineering work expenses, and debt servicing, in that order.

Public welfare expenses: Expenses for the construction and operation of welfare facilities for children, the elderly, the mentally and physically disabled, etc. and for the implementation of livelihood protection, etc.

Education expenses: Expenses for school education, social education, etc.

Civil engineering work expenses: Expenses for the construction and improvement of public facilities, such as roads, rivers, housing, and parks.

Public debt payment: Expenses for the payment of principal, interest, etc. on debts.

## Composition of Expenditure by Function (FY2008 settlement)

Net total

¥89,691.5 billion

Prefectures

¥47,349.0 billion

Share
5,496.0 (Unit: ¥billion)	11.6%
11,057.7	23.4%
6,265.2	13.2%
6,748.6	14.3%
3,183.4	6.7%
1,396.5	2.9%
3,646.6	7.7%
2,435.5	5.1%
7,119.5	15.1%

Municipalities

¥48,388.4 billion

Share
13,934.7 (Unit: ¥billion)	28.8%
5,155.7	10.7%
6,819.6	14.1%
6,489.7	13.4%
6,387.2	13.2%
4,104.2	8.5%
1,725.6	3.6%
1,237.1	2.6%
2,534.6	5.1%
## Breakdown of Public Welfare Expenses by Purpose

Net total

¥17,821.1 billion

Prefectures

¥5,496.0 billion

Municipalities

¥13,934.7 billion

## Breakdown of Educational Expenses by Purpose

Net total ¥16,146.7 billion

Prefectures

¥11,057.7 billion

Municipalities

¥5,155.7 billion

## Breakdown of Civil Engineering Work Expenses by Purpose

Net total ¥12,871.2 billion

Prefectures ¥6,265.2 billion
## Trends in the Breakdown of Expenditures by Function (ordinary account net total)

Unit: Ratio with FY1992 set at 100.

In recent years, welfare expenses, public debt payments and so on have been increasing, while there has been a decline in such items as agriculture, forestry, and fishery expenses and civil engineering work expenses.
## What are expenses used for?

## Expenses by Type

Classified by type, expenses can be divided into "obligatory expenses" (personnel expenses, social assistance expenses and public debt payments), which are mandatory and difficult to cut down at the discretion of individual local governments; "investment expenses," including ordinary construction expenses, etc.; and "other expenses."

## Composition of Expenditures by Type (FY2008 settlement)

Net total ¥89,691.5 billion
## ●Trends in Personnel Expenses

Fiscal year | Net total (billion yen) | Prefectures (billion yen) | Municipalities (billion yen) | Municipalities (billion yen)
FY1999 | 27047.5 | 15895.5 | 11151.9 | 11086.0
FY2000 | 26877.5 | 15791.5 | 11086.0 | 11040.5
FY2001 | 26838.3 | 15797.8 | 11040.5 | 10764.6
FY2002 | 26394.2 | 15629.6 | 10764.6 | 10587.9
FY2003 | 25932.3 | 15344.3 | 10587.9 | 10395.7
FY2004 | 25613.3 | 15217.6 | 10395.7 | 10255.7
FY2005 | 25264.3 | 15008.6 | 10255.7 | 10124.0
FY2006 | 25135.3 | 15011.3 | 10124.0 | 10169.4
FY2007 | 25256.3 | 15086.9 | 10169.4 | 10124.0
FY2008 | 24605.2 | 14729.7 | 9875.5 | 9875.5

## Breakdown of Personnel Expenses by Item

| **Net total (¥24,605.2 billion)** | | | | |
## ●Trends in the Breakdown of Expenditures by Type (ordinary account net total)

Unit: Ratio with FY1992 set at 100.

In recent years, social assistance expenses, public debt payments and so on have been increasing, while there has been a decline in such items as ordinary construction expenses.

*Social assistance expenses: Expenses which include child welfare expenses, livelihood protection expenses, etc., aimed at assisting the needy, children, the elderly, mentally and physically disabled, etc., as a part of the social security system.

*Ordinary construction expenses: Expenses necessary for the construction of social capital, such as roads, bridges, parks, schools, etc.
# Flexibility of the Financial Structure

## How can local finance respond to the demands of local governments?

In addition to revenue sources allocated for obligatory expenses that are needed each year, local governments must also secure revenue sources for measures to respond properly to changes in the social economy and administrative needs in order to accurately meet the needs of residents. The extent to which these revenue resources can be secured is called the “flexibility of the financial structure.”

## Ordinary Balance Ratio

The national average of the ordinary balance ratio (the ratio of ordinary revenues allocated to expenses recurring every fiscal year to the total of ordinary revenues recurring every fiscal year, centered on local taxes and the local allocation tax, as well as the special portion of tax reduction supplementary bonds and extraordinary financial countermeasures bonds) decreased by 0.6 percentage points from the previous fiscal year, falling to 92.8%. While this is a slight drop on the previous fiscal year, the ratio continues to maintain a high level.

Note: Tax-reduction supplementary bonds and extraordinary financial countermeasures bonds were added from fiscal 2001.
## Real Debt Service Ratio and Debt Service Payment Ratio Used for Permission to Issue Local Bonds

It is necessary to keep a close watch on trends in public debt payments at all times, since public debt payments, payments of the principal and the interest on the debts of local governments, are expenses especially lacking flexibility.

The real debt service ratio and debt service payment ratio are indices used to determine the extent of the public debt payment burden.

## State of the Real Debt Service Ratio

For information on the state of the real debt service ratio, please refer to the “State of the Ratio for Determining Soundness and Ratio of Fund Shortages” (on page 29).

## $ ^{*} $ Real debt service ratio:

The real debt service ratio indicates the ratio of the principal and interest repayments on local bonds (excluding advanced redemption, etc.) and the real debt service amount—which includes items corresponding to debt service expenses, such as disbursements to public enterprise bonds—minus the amount calculated for standard financial demand in the calculation of local allocation tax from that portion of general revenue resources that is allotted for the aforementioned purpose to the total of the standard financial scale (excluding public bonds calculated into the amount of standard financial demand in the calculation of local allocation tax, etc.). It is used to determine organizations that require consultations or permission to issue bonds. If the ratio is over 18%, the organization needs permission to issue bonds; if it is over 25%, the issue of certain kinds of local bonds is restricted; and if it is over 35%, the restrictions are tightened even more. It is also considered as a Ratio for Determining Soundness in “Law Relating to the Financial Soundness of Local Governments.” The early financial soundness criterion and the financial rebuilding criterion account for 25% and 35%, respectively.

## Trends in the Debt Service Payment Ratio Used for Permission to Issue Local Bonds

Fiscal year | Prefectures (%) | Nationwide (%) | Municipalities (%)
FY1999 | 17.2 | 16.9 | 16.3
FY2000 | 17.7 | 17.6 | 16.3
FY2001 | 18.4 | 18.4 | 16.7
FY2002 | 19.2 | 19.8 | 17.3
FY2003 | 19.4 | 19.8 | 17.5
FY2004 | 19.4 | 19.9 | 17.3
FY2005 | 19.2 | 19.3 | 17.4
FY2006 | 19.3 | 19.4 | 17.5
FY2007 | 19.1 | 18.6 | 17.7
FY2008 | 19.3 | 19.2 | 17.6

## $ ^{*} $ Debt service payment ratio used for permission to issue local bonds:

The debt service payment ratio indicates the ratio of general revenue resources allocated for public debt service (general financial resources allocated for public service, including the principal and interest repayments on local bonds) to the total amount of general revenue resources. This index is used to determine the flexibility of the financial structure by assessing the level that public debt payments restrict the freedom of use of general revenues.
# Outstanding Local Government Borrowing What is the state of debts in local public finance?

## Trends in Outstanding Local Government Borrowing

Outstanding local government borrowing, the debts of local governments, amounted to approximately ¥137 trillion at the end of fiscal 2008. This figure has been increasing in recent years because of such factors as the need to supplement tax revenue as a result of tax cuts and the issue of extraordinary financial countermeasures bonds. The figure is 1.49 times larger than total revenue and about 2.44 times larger than the total sum of general revenue resources, such as local taxes and local allocation tax.

| FY1997 | FY2002 | FY2004 | FY2005 | FY2006 | FY2007 | FY2008 | (End of FY)
Other local bonds | 80.3 | 83.0 | 81.4 | 79.4 | 77.9 | 76.9 | 75.7 |
Financial aid bonds | 9.9 | 18.0 | 19.2 | 19.4 | 19.3 | 19.1 | 18.7 |
Tax-reduction supplementary bonds, etc. | 6.0 | 7.6 | 8.2 | 8.2 | 8.0 | 7.4 | 6.8 |
Tax revenue supplementary bonds | 5.4 | 6.5 | 5.7 | 5.3 | 4.9 | 5.0 | 5.5 |
Extraordinary financial countermeasures bonds | 9.9 | 3.8 | 12.9 | 15.7 | 17.9 | 19.7 | 21.6 |
Economic stimulus measures | 111.5 | 15.2 | 13.2 | 12.1 | 11.1 | 10.1 | 9.1 |

Notes:

1. Outstanding local government borrowing excludes special fund public investment bonds.

2. Figures for “economic stimulus measures” are estimates.
## Outstanding Borrowing of Local Finance

Also, the outstanding borrowing of local public finance—which includes the local burden of borrowing from the special account for the local allocation tax and transfer tax grants, which are used to address local financial resource shortages, as well as the redemption of public enterprise bonds borne by the ordinary account—remains at a high level, amounting to approximately ¥197 trillion at the end of fiscal 2008.

## ●Trends in Outstanding Borrowing that Should be Shouldered by the Ordinary Account and the Ratio of Outstanding Borrowing to Gross Domestic Product

Notes:

1. Outstanding local government borrowing excludes special fund public investment bonds.

2. Outstanding public enterprise bonds (borne by the ordinary account) are estimates based on settlement account statistics.
# Local Public Enterprises What is the state of local public enterprises?

## Ratio of Local Public Enterprises

Local public enterprises play a major role in improving the standard of living of residents.

Sewage disposal population

of 107.74 million persons

98.15 million persons

(91.1%)

No. of passengers

a year

of 22,976 million persons

3,035 million persons

(13.2%)

No. of passengers

a year

of 4,538 million persons

1,050 million persons

(23.1%)

of 1,609,000 beds

224,000 beds

(13.9%)

Notes:

1. The graph shows the ratio of local public enterprises when the total number of business entities nationwide is taken as 100.

2. Figures for the total number of enterprises nationwide are compiled from statistical materials of related organizations; figures for local public enterprises are compiled from figures for the total number of enterprises and settlements for the same fiscal year.
## Number of Businesses Operated by Local Public Enterprises

The number of businesses is 9,096. By type of business, sewerage accounts for the largest ratio, followed in order by water supply, hospitals, care services, and housing development projects.

## Scale of Financial Settlement

The total financial settlement scale is ¥20,314.8 billion. By type of business, sewerage accounts for the largest ratio, followed in order by hospitals, water supply, and residential development.

Scale of Financial Settlement ¥20,314.8 billion

(End of FY2008)
## Management Conditions

Local public enterprises had a surplus of ¥187.9 billion. By type of business, while water supply, electricity, and sewerage showed a surplus, hospitals are continuing to register a deficit.

●Trends in Management Conditions of Local Public Enterprises

| | | | | | |
## Subject of Ratio for Determining Soundness
## I mage of Early Financial Soundness, Financial Rebuilding, and Soundness of Public Enterprise Management

$ ^{*} $ 1: The figures without parenthesis are the criteria for municipalities; the figures in parenthesis are the criteria for prefectures.

$ ^{*} $ 2: Under the previous Reconstruction Law, an organization under reconstruction is required to ensure equilibrium of the real balance.

## 2 State of the Ratio for Determining Soundness and the Financial Shortfall Ratio

## 1 Real Deficit Ratio

The following table illustrates the state of the real deficit ratio based on fiscal 2008 account settlements. Nineteen organizations come under the category of organizations with a real deficit (i.e. with their real deficit ratio exceeding 0%). Among these, there are two organizations whose real deficit ratio equals or exceeds the early financial soundness criterion. Furthermore, the real deficit ratio of one of the two organizations equals or exceeds the financial rebuilding criterion.
## 2 Consolidated Real Deficit Ratio

The following table illustrates the state of the consolidated real deficit ratio based on fiscal 2008 account settlements.

Thirty-nine organizations come under the category of organizations with a consolidated real deficit (i.e. with their consolidated real deficit ratio exceeding 0%). Among these, there are two organizations whose consolidated real deficit ratio equals or exceeds the early financial soundness criterion. Furthermore, the consolidated real deficit ratio of one of the two organizations equals or exceeds the financial rebuilding criterion.

## 3 Real Debt Service Ratio

The following table illustrates the state of the real debt service ratio based on fiscal 2008 account settlements.

There are 20 organizations whose real debt service ratio equals or exceeds the early financial soundness criterion. Among these, there is one organization whose real debt service ratio equals or exceeds the financial rebuilding criterion.
## 4 Future Burden Ratio

The following table illustrates the state of the future burden ratio based on fiscal 2008 account settlements.

There are three organizations whose future burden ratio equals or exceeds the early financial soundness criterion.

## 5 Financial Shortfall Ratio

The following table illustrates the state of the financial shortfall ratio based on fiscal 2008 account settlements.

The accounts of 202 public enterprises come under the category of accounts with a financial shortfall (i.e. with their financial shortfall ratio exceeding 0%). Among these, there are 61 accounts whose financial shortfall ratio equals or exceeds the financial soundness criterion.
## Administrative and Fiscal Reform

## 1 Intensive Reform Plans

In order to thoroughly promote local administrative reform, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications has compiled “New Guidelines for the Promotion of Administrative Reform in Local Governments” (New Local Administrative Reform Guidelines) and notified local governments of these on March 29, 2005.

As a result, local governments have compiled and disclosed intensive reform plans indicating specific efforts, such as the reorganization and arrangement of administrative work and projects and the promotion of private-sector consignment, to be undertaken in general until fiscal 2009.

## 2 Further Promotion of Administrative and Financial Reform

On August 31, 2006, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications formulated its “Guidelines for the Further Promotion of Administrative Reform in Local Governments” and requested local governments to make positive efforts toward three reforms: the reform of total personnel expenses, reform of public services, and reform of local public accounting. As of April 1, 2009, 45 prefectures, 16 government ordinance-designated cities, and 1,417 municipalities have already reviewed their status in these respects.

## Reform of total personnel expenses

A further net reduction in the number of employees has been achieved bearing in mind the net reduction in the number of national public employees

Promotion of salary reforms (as a reflection of regional private-sector salaries, further rationalizing of salaries)

Efforts to curb personnel expenditures by third-sector enterprises, etc.

## Reform of public services

Implementation of studies in light of project classifications and overall inspection of the need for public services and implementing entities

Setting of performance indexes related to the maintenance and improvement of public services and numerical targets related to expenditure reductions, etc., in the implementation of marketization tests

## Reform of local public accounting (local asset and debt management reform)

Promotion of the compilation of four documents: balance sheets, administrative cost statements, financial balance statements, and net asset fluctuation statements

Formulation of the direction and specific measures for asset and debt reforms including promotion of the sale of unused assets, the effective utilization of assets, etc.

## Formulation of Rules for Information Disclosure to Facilitate Comparisons and Appraisal Between Local Governments and the Strengthening of Resident Monitoring

Enhancement of disclosure systems, including salary information

Further promotion of financial information disclosure to enable comparisons between organizations

Disclosure of the implementation process and implementation of the results of marketization tests

Active appointment of outside personnel as auditors and the utilization of external auditing