Silviase/jgov_v1.4_full_ann huggingface dataset:
独自利用事務の内容が、地方公共団体から金銭及び物品を支給するものである場合（経済的利益の移転）

事例：ア 重度心身障害者等の医療費助成に関する事務

偉寧児の育成に係る手当等の支給に関する事務

ウ 心身障害者の福祉に係る手当等の支給に関する事務

エ 障害福祉に係るサービス等の利用者負担の助成に関する事務

オ 障害者の日常生活及び社会生活を総合的に支援するための法律（以下「障害者総合支援法」という。）に基づく地域生活支援事業の実施に関する事務（日常生活用具給付、移動支援等に関する事務等）

力 心身障害者扶養共済制度の掛金減免に関する事務

キ 上記アから力までのいずれかに類する事務

※ 障害者総合支援法に基づく地域生活支援事業については、主務省令が定まる

までの当面の措置として情報連携を実施するものである。

## 13 児童手当法による児童手当又は特例給付の支給に関する事務であって主務省令で定めるもの（番号法別表第二の七十四の項）に準ずる独自利用事務

次の(1)及び(2)の条件を満たすものである。

(1) 法定事務の根拠法律と趣旨・目的が一致すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の対象者が、おおむね児童手当法第一条に定める「児童」又は「児童を養育している者」に該当する者であって、独自利用事務の根拠規範において具体的に定められている場合

独自利用事務の目的が、児童等の健やかな成長である場合（独自利用事務の根拠規範において「成長」、「福祉の増進（向上）」、「保健の向上」、「健康の保持（増進、向上）」又はこれらに類する語により規定されている場合）

(2) 法定事務の内容と類似すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の内容が、地方公共団体から金銭及び物品を支給するものである場合（経済的利益の移転）

事例：子どもの医療費助成に関する事務又はこれに類する事務

## 14 介護保険法による保険給付の支給、地域支援事業の実施又は保険料の徴収に関する事務あって主務省令で定めるもの（番号法別表第二の九十四の項）に準ずる独自利用事務次の(1)及び(2)の条件を満たすものである。

(1) 法定事務の根拠法律と趣旨・目的が一致すると認められる場合

ア 独自利用事務の対象者が、おおむね六十五歳以上の者又はおおむね介護保険法第
二条第一項に定める「要介護状態又は要支援状態の者」に該当する者であって、独自利用事務の根拠規範において具体的に定められている場合（なお、介護者に介護用品等を支給する場合であって、当該事務の効果が要介護者に明らかに及ぶ場合を含む。）

独自利用事務の目的が、対象者の保健医療の向上又は福祉の増進を図ることである場合（独自利用事務の根拠規範において「保健の向上」、「福祉の増進 (向上)」、「健康の保持（増進、向上）」又はこれらに類する語により規定されている場合）

## (2) 法定事務の内容と類似すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の内容が、地方公共団体から金銭及び物品を支給するものである場合（経済的利益の移転）

## 事例：ア高齢者の医療費助成に関する事務

イ介護サービス等利用者負担軽減に関する事務

ウ介護サービス等の給付に関する事務（介護用品支給に関する事務、日常生活用具の給付に関する事務、住宅改造等費用助成に関する事務、移動支援に関する事務等（介護保険法に基づく市町村特別給付及び地域支援事業を含む。))

上記アからウまでのいずれかに類する事務

※ 介護保険法に基づく地域支援事業（法定事務に係るものを除く。）及び市町村特別給付については、主務省令が定まるまでの当面の措置として情報連携を実施するものである。

## 15 感染症の予防及び感染症の患者に対する医療に関する法律による費用の負担又は療養費の支給に関する事務であって主務省令で定めるもの（番号法別表第二の九十七の項）に準ずる独自利用事務

次の(1)及び(2)の条件を満たすものである。

(1) 法定事務の根拠法律と趣旨・目的が一致すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の対象者が、おおむね感染症の予防及び感染症の患者に対する医療に関する法律第六条に定める「感染症」の患者に該当する者であって、独自利用事務の根拠規範において具体的に定められている場合

独自利用事務の目的が、公衆衛生の向上及び増進である場合（独自利用事務の根拠規範において「公衆衛生の向上 (増進)」、「感染の予防 (防止)」、「健康の保持 (増進)」又はこれらに類する語により規定されている場合）

(2) 法定事務の内容と類似すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の内容が、地方公共団体から金銭及び物品を支給するものである場合（経済的利益の移転）

事例：肝炎・結核等の感染症の医療費助成に関する事務又はこれらに類する事務
## 16 独立行政法人日本学生支援機構法による学資の貸与に関する事務であって主務省令で定めるもの（番号法別表第二の百六の項）に準ずる独自利用事務

次の(1)及び(2)の条件を満たすものである。

(1) 法定事務の根拠法律と趣旨・目的が一致すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の対象者が、おおむね独立行政法人日本学生支援機構法第三条に定める「学生等」又は高等学校等就学支援金の支給に関する法律第一条に定める「高等学校等の生徒等」に該当する者であって、独自利用事務の根拠規範において具体的に定められている場合

独自利用事務の目的が、対象者の教育の機会均等である場合（独自利用事務の根拠規範において「教育の機会均等」、「修学の促進」、「人材の育成（確保）」又はこれらに類する語により規定されている場合）

(2) 法定事務の内容と類似すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の内容が、地方公共団体から金銭を貸与するものである場合

事例：学資の貸与に関する事務（高校・大学等）又はこれに類する事務

## 17 障害者の日常生活及び社会生活を総合的に支援するための法律による自立支援給付の支給又は地域生活支援事業の実施に関する事務であって主務省令で定めるもの（番号法別表第二の百八の項）に準ずる独自利用事務

次の(1)及び(2)の条件を満たすものである。

(1) 法定事務の根拠法律と趣旨・目的が一致すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の対象者が、おおむね障害者総合支援法第一条に定める「障害者」又は「障害児」若しくはその保護者であって、独自利用事務の根拠規範において具体的に定められている場合

独自利用事務の目的が、対象者の福祉の増進を図ることである場合（独自利用事務の根拠規範において「福祉の増進（向上）」、「保健の向上」、「健康の保持（増進、向上）」又はこれらに類する語により規定されている場合）

(2) 法定事務の内容と類似すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の内容が、地方公共団体から金銭及び物品を支給するものである場合（経済的利益の移転）

事例：ア 重度心身障害者等の医療費助成に関する事務

イ 障害児の育成に係る手当等の支給に関する事務

ウ 心身障害者の福祉に係る手当等の支給に関する事務
エ 障害福祉に係るサービス等の利用者負担の助成に関する事務

オ 障害者総合支援法に基づく地域生活支援事業の実施に関する事務（日常生活用具給付、移動支援等に関する事務等）

力 心身障害者扶養共済制度の掛金減免に関する事務

キ 上記アから力までのいずれかに類する事務

※ 障害者総合支援法に基づく地域生活支援事業については、主務省令が定まるまでの当面の措置として情報連携を実施するものである。

## 18 高等学校等就学支援金の支給に関する法律による就学支援金の支給に関する事務であって主務省令で定めるもの（番号法別表第二の百十三の項）に準ずる独自利用事務

次の(1)及び(2)の条件を満たすものである。

(1) 法定事務の根拠法律と趣旨・目的が一致すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の対象者が、おおむね高等学校等就学支援金の支給に関する法律第一条に定める「高等学校等の生徒等」若しくは学校教育法第一条に定める「幼稚園、小学校、中学校」に通う幼児、児童若しくは生徒又はその保護者であって、独自利用事務の根拠規範において具体的に定められている場合

独自利用事務の目的が、対象者の教育の機会均等である場合（独自利用事務の根拠規範において「教育の機会均等」又はこれに類する語により規定されている場合）

(2) 法定事務の内容と類似すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の内容が、地方公共団体から金銭及び物品を支給するものである場合（経済的利益の移転）

事例：ア 高等学校等就学支援金の支給に関する事務に併せてその他の給付等を実施している事務

イ 私立高等学校等への奨学給付金の支給に関する事務

ウ 就学援助に関する事務（小学校・中学校向け、ただし医療費は除く。）

エ 幼稚園就園奨励費の支給に関する事務

オ 上記アからエまでのいずれかに類する事務

## 19 子ども・子育て支援法による子どものための教育・保育給付の支給又は地域子ども・子育て支援事業の実施に関する事務であって主務省令で定めるもの（番号法別表第二の百十六の項）に準ずる独自利用事務

次の(1)及び(2)の条件を満たすものである。

(1) 法定事務の根拠法律と趣旨・目的が一致すると認められる場合

ア 独自利用事務の対象者が、おおむね子ども・子育て支援法第六条に定める「子ども」に該当する者又はその保護者であって、独自利用事務の根拠規範において具体的に
定められている場合

独自利用事務の目的が、対象者の健やかな成長である場合（独自利用事務の根拠規範において「福祉の増進（向上）」、「子どもの健全な育成」、「育児の支援」、「幼児教育の振興（充実）」又はこれらに類する語により規定されている場合）

(2) 法定事務の内容と類似すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の内容が、地方公共団体から金銭及び物品を支給するものである場合（経済的利益の移転）

事例：ア 保育所保育料の減免・免除に関する事務

イ 幼稚園就園奨励費の支給に関する事務

ウ子ども・子育て支援法に基づく地域子ども・子育て支援事業の実施に関する事務

上記アからウまでのいずれかに類する事務

※ 子ども・子育て支援法に基づく地域子ども・子育て支援事業については、主務省令が定まるまでの当面の措置として情報連携を実施するものである。

## 20 難病の患者に対する医療等に関する法律による特定医療費の支給に関する事務であって主務省令で定めるもの（番号法別表第二の百二十の項）に準ずる独自利用事務

次の(1)及び(2)の条件を満たすものである。

(1) 法定事務の根拠法律と趣旨・目的が一致すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の対象者が、おおむね難病の患者に対する医療等に関する法律第一条に定める「難病の患者」に該当する者又は不妊治療を行っている者若しくは行おうとする者（以下「難病患者等」という。）であって、独自利用事務の根拠規範において具体的に定められている場合

独自利用事務の目的が、難病患者等の福祉の増進である場合（独自利用事務の根拠規範において「福祉の増進」、「保健の向上」、「医療費の負担軽減」又はこれらに類する語により規定されている場合）

(2) 法定事務の内容と類似すると認められる場合

独自利用事務の内容が、地方公共団体から金銭及び物品を支給するものである場合（経済的利益の移転）

事例：ア 難病患者の医療費助成に関する事務

イ 不姫治療費用の補助に関する事務

ウ 上記ア又はイに類する事務
# GUIDELINES TO APPLICATION OF THE ANTIMONOPOLY ACT CONCERNING REVIEW OF BUSINESS COMBINATION (Tentative Translation)

## May 31, 2004

Japan Fair Trade Commission

Revised as of May 1, 2006

Revised as of March 28, 2007

Revised as of January 5, 2009

Revised as of January 1, 2010

Revised as of June 14, 2011

Revised as of December 17, 2019

## I ntroduction

Chapter IV of the Antimonopoly Act (Act on Prohibition of Private Monopolization and Maintenance of Fair Trade (Act No. 54 of 1947), hereinafter referred to as “the

Act”) prohibits the acquisition or possession (hereinafter referred to as “holding”) of the shares of a company (including shares of partnership, the same shall apply hereinafter) (Article 10 of the Act), interlocking directorates (Article 13 of the Act), shareholding by a person other than a company (Article 14 of the Act) or a merger of companies (Article 15 of the Act), joint incorporation-type split or absorption-type split (Article 15-2 of the Act), joint share transfer (Article 15-3 of the Act), or acquisition of businesses, etc. (Article 16 of the Act) (hereinafter referred to as “business combination”), where it creates a business combination that may be substantially to restrain competition in any particular field of trade, or where a business combination is created through an unfair trade practice. Prohibited business combinations are subject to elimination measures pursuant to Article 17-2 of the Act.

To review whether the effect of a business combination may be substantially to restrain competition in any particular field of trade (hereinafter referred to as a “review of business combination” or a “review”), the Japan Fair Trade Commission (hereinafter referred to as “JFTC”) has already clarified the underlying principles through the “Guidelines for Interpretation on the Stipulation that The Effect May Be Substantially to Restrain Competition in a Particular Field of Trade” Concerning M&A.
on December 21, 1998. However, to improve transparency and predictability regarding the review of business combinations, the JFTC has prepared these

“Guidelines to Application of the Antimonopoly Act concerning Review of Business Combination” (hereinafter referred to as the “Guidelines”), taking into account its experience in reviews to date.

The JFTC has also released summaries of the review of certain cases such as the cases in which notifications or other submissions were accepted, as a reference for business operators having a business combination plan because these may be useful for them. The JFTC continues to be ready to provide more information with the aim of ensuring predictability and regulatory transparency of the reviews. When planning a business combination, reference should be made not only to the Guidelines but also to the outline of past cases.

The Guidelines first indicate the categories of business combinations that are to be reviewed under the Act (Part I). Second, they set out the criteria for defining a particular field of trade (Part II). Third, they clarify the meaning of “may be substantially to restrain competition” (Part III). They then set out the analytical framework and the criteria for assessing whether a business combination may be substantially to restrain competition in accordance with the categories of business combinations (Parts IV, V and VI). Finally, they illustrate remedial measures for resolving the problems associated with a business combination that may be substantially to restrain competition (Part VII).

The JFTC will review business combinations along with the Guidelines and determine whether or not a business combination may be substantially to restrain competition in any particular field of trade in light of the provision of Article 4 of the Act, irrespective of whether it is subject to the current reporting or notification requirement pursuant to Chapter IV of the Act. Meanwhile, with the formulation of the Guidelines, the Guidelines for Interpretation on the “Stipulation that The Effect May Be Substantially to Restrain Competition in a Particular Field of Trade” Concerning M&A (Japan Fair Trade Commission, December 21, 1998, including Supplement thereof dated April 1, 2001) is hereby abolished.

### Part I. Subject of the Review of Business Combination

Chapter IV of the Act prohibits any business combination that may be substantially to restrain competition in a particular field of trade. The Chapter regulates business combinations because they can have an impact
on competition in the market (a particular field of trade) through the forming, maintaining or strengthening of a relationship in which two or more companies operate a business in a united form, whether fully or partially by shareholding, mergers or other transactions (this relationship is hereinafter referred to as a "joint relationship").

Accordingly, if two or more companies continue to operate businesses as independent competitive units, even though they have interlocking shareholdings or directorates, and if these companies that are already in a joint relationship merely alter the form of an organization through a merger, there is little impact on competition. Thus, these types of arrangements should not be prohibited pursuant to Chapter IV.

This part clarifies the categories of business combinations whose impact on competition should be reviewed.

In Part 1, a company that engages in a business combination shall be referred to as “party.”

### 1. Shareholding

## (1) Shareholding by a Company

A. The review considers whether a joint relationship is to be formed, maintained or strengthened between the company acquiring shares (hereinafter referred to as a “shareholding company”) and the company whose shares are acquired (hereinafter referred to as the “share issuing company”) in the following cases.

(a) When the ratio of the total number of voting rights pertaining to shares held by companies, etc. that belong to the group of combined companies (the group of combined companies prescribed in paragraph (2), Article 10 of the Act, the same shall apply hereinafter) to which the shareholding company belongs to all of the voting rights of the share issuing company exceeds 50%. However, if the shareholding company established the share issuing company and the former acquired all of the voting rights of the latter concurrently with the establishment, it usually does not require a review (see (4) A, infra).

(b) When the ratio of the total number of voting rights pertaining to shares held by companies, etc. that belong to the group of combined companies to which the shareholding company belongs to all of the voting rights of the share issuing company exceeds 20% and the said ratio stands alone as the top-ranked.

B. Excluding the cases described above, it is considered that most of the
cases do not require business combination review in general but the following items will be taken into consideration to determine whether a joint relationship is formed, maintained or strengthened. Regarding such cases the ratio of voting rights held (the ratio of the voting rights pertaining to shares held by the shareholding company to all the voting rights of the share issuing company, the same shall apply hereinafter) is 10% or less, or and the shareholding company is not ranked among the top three holders of voting rights, a joint relationship is not formed, maintained or strengthened so that in general the case does not require a business combination review.

a) The extent of the ratio of voting rights held

(b) The rank as a holder of voting rights, differences in and distribution of the ratios of voting rights held among the holders, and other relationships between holders

(c) Cross-holding of voting rights (the share issuing company concurrently holds voting rights of the shareholding company) and other mutual relationships between the companies involved (hereinafter referred to as “parties”)

(d) Whether officers or employees of one of the parties are officers of the other parties

(e) Trading relationship between the parties (including financial relationship)

(f) Relationships between the parties based on business alliance, technical assistance and other agreements or agreements

(g) Items (a) through (f), when including companies that already have joint relationships with the parties

C. For a joint investment company (a company jointly established or acquired by two or more companies through an agreement to pursue operations necessary to achieve mutual benefits; the same shall apply hereinafter), trading relationships between the parties and relationships based on business alliances and agreements will be considered to determine whether the business combination should be reviewed. (As far as a joint relationship between the investing companies is concerned, a joint relationship is indirectly formed, maintained or strengthened through the joint investment company even if there is no direct shareholding relationship between the investing companies. Accordingly, if the business activities of the shareholding companies are integrated through the establishment of the joint investment company, this fact itself indicates that there will be
an impact on competition. (See 2 (1) C and 3 (1) D in Part IV, infra) (Fig.1)

(2) Shareholdings by a Person Other than a Company “A person other than a company” means a person other than a stock company, mutual company, general partnership company, limited partnership company, limited liability company or foreign company as prescribed by the Companies Act and other laws and ordinances; it does not matter whether the person is a business operator or not. Specifically, incorporated foundations, incorporated associations, special corporations, local public entities, cooperatives, associations, natural persons and all other persons that can hold shares are included.

The existence of shareholdings by a person other than a company shall be examined in the same manner as (1) above.

(3) Scope of Joint Relationships

If a joint relationship is formed, maintained or strengthened between the parties concerned through the shareholdings, a joint relationship is also formed, maintained or strengthened among the parties and the companies which already have a joint relationship with the parties.

(4) Shareholdings Not Requiring a Review

In the case of A below, a joint relationship is not formed or strengthened so that, in general, it does not require a review. In addition, even in the case of item B below, a business combination is not formed or strengthened so that, in general, most do not require a review. However, if a joint relationship is formed or strengthened between companies, etc. that belongs to the relevant group of combined companies and other shareholders, this joint relationship will require a review.

A. The shareholding company establishes the share issuing company and the
former acquires all of the voting rights of the latter concurrently with the establishment (See (1) A (a) above)

B. The shareholding company and the share issuing company belong to the same group of combined companies

2. Interlocking Directorates Joint investment company Investing Company

A Investing Company B Capital Investment Capital investment

A joint relationship is formed, maintained or strengthened between the investing companies and between each of the investing companies and the joint investment company (1) Scope of Officers

An “officer” is defined in paragraph (3), Article 2 of the Act as “a trustee, director, executive officer, managing member, auditor, company auditor or any person with an equivalent position, a manager or other employee in charge of business of the main or branch office.” Thus, officers are directors and company auditors of stock companies and mutual companies; members who execute the business of a general partnership company, limited partnership company, or limited liability company; managers defined by the Companies Act (Article 10 of Companies Act) and other employees deemed to have executive power equivalent to that of managers under the Companies Act (such as the general manager of a head office, a branch manager, the head of a business division) and the like. A “person with an equivalent position means a person who is not a director or auditor but who has a title such as adviser, counselor or consultant who actually participates in the management of the company by attending meetings of the board of directors or through other measures. A person who has only the title of division manager, department manager, section manager or supervisor is an employee and not an “officer.”

Moreover, the restriction on interlocking directors will not apply if an officer or an employee of a company completes procedures for retirement and is then appointed as an officer of another company.

(Note 1) Paragraph (1), Article 13 of the Act defines in the parenthesis an “employee” as “a person other than an officer in the regular employ of a company.”

While temporary employment is not included, temporary loan employees are considered employees.

(2) Joint Relationships through Interlocking Directorates

A. In the following cases, a joint relationship is formed, maintained or strengthened between interlocking companies when an officer or an employee
of a company serves concurrently as an officer of another company and that interlocking requires a review.

(a) The officers or employees of one company comprise a majority of the total number of officers of another company.

(b) Interlocking directorates in which the directors have the authority to represent both companies

B. Excluding item A above, the following items will be taken into consideration to determine whether a joint relationship is formed, maintained or strengthened.

(a) Whether an interlocking directorate is formed by full-time or representative directors

(b) The ratio of officers or employees of one of the interlocking companies to the total number of officers of one of the other interlocking companies

(c) Mutual holding of voting rights between the interlocking companies

(d) The trading relationships (including financial relationships), business alliance and other relationships between the interlocking companies

(3) Scope of Joint Relationships

When a joint relationship is formed, maintained or strengthened between interlocking companies through interlocking directorates, a joint relationship is formed, maintained and strengthened between companies, including companies that already have a joint relationship with the interlocking companies.

(4) Interlocking Directorates Not Requiring a Review

A. In cases such as the following, a joint relationship is not formed, maintained or strengthened so that in general the case does not require a review.

(a) Only persons without representation authority serve concurrently as officers, and in either of the interlocking companies the ratio of officers or employees of the other company to the total number of its officers is 10% or less.

(b) Only persons other than full-time officers serve concurrently in companies in which the voting rights held at 10% or less of the total, and in either of the inter locking companies the ratio of officers or employees of the other company to the total number of its officers is 25% or less.

B. When the interlocking companies belong to the same group of combined companies, a joint relationship is not formed or strengthened so that in general most are not considered to require a review. However, if a joint
relationship is formed or strengthened with shareholders other than companies, etc. that belong to the same group of combined companies as the interlocking companies, this joint relationship will require a review.

### 3. Mergers

## (1) Mergers

In a merger, two or more companies combine to form a single company. Therefore, a merger is the strongest joint relationship that can be formed between companies.

Consequently, even if a certain joint relationship formed through shareholdings or interlocking directorates may be deemed not to have a strong impact on competition or to cause a problem, the joint relationship could be strengthened through a merger under the same set of circumstances, and the merger could present a problem.

## (2) Scope of Joint Relationships

When a merger is conducted, a joint relationship is formed, maintained or strengthened between the parties and the companies that have already formed a joint relationship with the parties.

## (3) Mergers Not Requiring a Review

In the case of item A below, a joint relationship is not formed or strengthened so that in general it does not require a review. In addition, even in the case of item B below, a business combination is not formed or strengthened so that in general most are not considered to require a review. However, if a joint relationship is formed or strengthened with shareholders other than companies, etc. that belong to the same groups of combined companies as the merging companies, this joint relationship requires a review.

A. Mergers that are solely for the purpose of converting a share company to a general partnership company, limited partnership company, limited liability company or mutual company; converting a general partnership company to a share company, limited partnership company or limited liability company; converting a limited partnership company to a share company, general partnership company or limited liability company; converting a limited liability company to a share company, general partnership company or limited partnership company or converting a mutual company to a share company

B. When all the companies intending to merge with each other belong to the same group of combined companies