WT/TPR/M/310/Add.1 17 June 2015 (15-3146) Page

308 Pages·2015·1.96 MB·English

WT/TPR/M/310/Add.1

17 June 2015
(15-3146) Page: 1/308
Trade Policy Review Body Original: English/Spanish
9 and 11 March 2015 anglais/espagnol
inglés/español

TRADE POLICY REVIEW
JAPAN
MINUTES OF THE MEETING
Addendum
Chairperson: H.E. Mrs. Mariam MD Salleh (Malaysia)
This document contains the advance written questions and additional questions by
WTO Members, and replies provided by Japan.1

Organe d'examen des politiques commerciales
9 et 11 mars 2015
EXAMEN DES POLITIQUES COMMERCIALES
JAPON
COMPTE RENDU DE LA RÉUNION
Addendum
Présidente: S.E. Mme. Mariam MD Salleh (Malaisie)
Le présent document contient les questions écrites communiquées à l'avance par les
Membres de l'OMC, leurs questions additionnelles, et les réponses fournies par le Japan.1

Órgano de Examen de las Políticas Comerciales
9 y 11 de marzo de 2015
EXAMEN DE LAS POLÍTICAS COMERCIALES
JAPÓN
ACTA DE LA REUNIÓN
Addendum
Presidenta: Excma. Sra. Mariam MD Salleh (Malasia)
En el presente documento figuran las preguntas presentadas anticipadamente por escrito y
las preguntas adicionales de los Miembros de la OMC, así como 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/310/Add.1

- 2 -

1. AUSTRALIA
Report by the Secretariat - WT/TPR/S/310

Trade and Investment Regime
1.2.1 Trade in goods and services
Page 17, 1.22

Australia notes the 'Program for Promoting Japan as an Asian Business Centre and Direct
Investment into Japan'.

Question

Can Japan provide further details of the types of tax incentives being offered under this
programme?

RESPONSE

The Government of Japan is offering the following tax incentives under the "Act for
Promotion of Japan as an Asian Business Center ", in order to attract global enterprises'
R&D and Regional Headquarters.

1. Corporate tax breaks
20% income deduction for 5 years (This tax incentive will end on 31 March 2015)

2. Income tax breaks
Deferral of taxation upon exercising stock options granted by overseas parent
companies to the time of selling the shares

1.3 Outlook
Page 18, 1.27

Australia notes the regulatory reforms to be pursued by utilizing the newly designated six National
Strategic Special Zones (NSSZ).

Question

Can Japan identify examples of possible regulatory reforms (in addition to the clarification of
employment rules/practices) that may be implemented in the Tokyo and Kansai areas, to foster
greater levels of innovation activity?

RESPONSE

As of February 2015, approved zone plans for Tokyo and Kansai Areas include the
following regulatory reforms: i) accelerated assessment procedures for advanced
medical treatment of medicines approved in six Western countries including Australia,
which have not yet been approved in Japan, in specific hospitals or medical centers,
ii) exceptional measures on regulations on numbers of bed for providing high-standard
medical care services, and iii) establishing Employment Consultation Center which
provides individual consultation service based on the "Employment Guidelines"
(published in April 2014), in order to support foreign companies and ventures business
through clarifying the conditions of employment and work. So far, three centers were
established at Fukuoka in November 2014, Kansai and Tokyo Areas in January 2015.

2.1 Major trade-related laws and regulations
Page 19, Table 2.1

Australia notes the 2014 amendment to the Act on Special Measures Concerning the Handling of
Legal Services by Foreign Lawyers (1986 Law No. 6).
WT/TPR/M/310/Add.1

- 3 -

Question

Could Japan expand on the effects of this amendment for foreign lawyers?

RESPONSE

The effect of this amendment is that a foreign lawyer registered under the laws and
regulations of Japan is allowed to establish a legal professional corporation
("Gaikokuho-jimu-Bengosi-hojin") to provide legal services.

2.3.2 Regional and preferential agreements
Page 21, Table 2.2

Australia notes that the Secretariat's report was published before the entry into force of the Japan
Australia Economic Partnership Agreement (JAEPA) on 15 January 2015.

Question

We would welcome an update by Japan on how JAEPA affects the TPR's assessments of Japan's
overall simple average applied MFN tariff rate.

RESPONSE

It is too early to give an update, as there is not sufficient trade data necessary for the
proper reassessment of the overall simple average, due to the short period of time since
JAEPA's entering into force.

3.1.1 Customs procedures and requirements
Page 26, paragraph 3.3

Australia notes the reduction in release time for Authorized Economic Operator import cargoes and
the time release study results for AEO vs non-AEO participants.

Question

Could Japan provide further information on what the key drivers were to achieving the time
savings for AEO participants?

RESPONSE

Japan considers the less frequent documentary examination and physical inspection of
AEO imported cargos reflecting the compliance of AEO to be a crucial factor for reducing
time for customs clearance. Japan has a view that this would be a major benefit
for AEOs.

3.1.6 Contingency trade measures
Page 33, 3.30

Question

What steps has Japan taken to ensure the multi-ministry makeup of the anti-dumping and
countervailing investigation teams are well-coordinated?

RESPONSE

The Minister of Finance, the Minister in charge of the relevant industry in Japan and the
Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry shall keep in close contact with each other with
respect to the investigation and price undertaking. Any determination on important
matters involved shall be made after consulting with each other.
WT/TPR/M/310/Add.1

- 4 -

[Reference] （Provisional translation)
* Cabinet Order on Anti-Dumping Duty

Article 18. The Minister of Finance, the Minister in charge of the relevant industry
provided for in paragraph (1) of Article 8 of the Act (hereinafter in this Article referred
to as "the Minister in charge of the relevant industry") and the Minister of Economy,
Trade and Industry, where it is found necessary to initiate an investigation, shall notify
each other of that fact. The Minister of Finance, the Minister in charge of the relevant
industry and the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry shall keep in close contact
with each other (including forwarding from the Minister of Finance to the Minister in
charge of the relevant industry and the Minister of Economy, Trade and industry copies
of documents submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) to (5) of Article 7 and paragraph (1)
of Article 14) with respect to the investigation (including the handling of the results of
the investigation) and the undertaking offered in accordance with paragraph (7) of
Article 8 of the Act, and any determination on important matters involved shall be made
after consulting with each other.

* Cabinet Order on Countervailing Duty

Article 14. The Minister of Finance, the Minister in charge of the relevant industry
provided for in paragraph (1) of Article 7 of the Act (hereinafter in this Article referred
to as "the Minister in charge of the relevant industry") and the Minister of Economy,
Trade and Industry, where it is found necessary to initiate an investigation, shall notify
each other of that fact. The Minister of Finance, the Minister in charge of the relevant
industry and the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry shall keep in close contact
with each other (including forwarding from the Minister of Finance to the Minister in
charge of the relevant industry and the Minister of Economy, Trade and industry copies
of documents submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) to (5) of Article 4 and paragraph (1)
of Article 11) with respect to the investigation (including the handling of the results of
the investigation) and the undertaking offered in accordance with paragraph (8) of
Article 7 of the Act, and any determination on important matters involved shall be made
after consulting with each other.

Question

Who is the final decision maker in an anti-dumping investigation? Is it a Minister, and if so, of
which Ministry?

RESPONSE

Any determination on important matters involved shall be made after all the Ministers
concerned consult with each other.

[Reference]（Provisional translation)
* Cabinet Order on Anti-Dumping Duty

Article 18. The Minister of Finance, the Minister in charge of the relevant industry
provided for in paragraph (1) of Article 8 of the Act (hereinafter in this Article referred
to as "the Minister in charge of the relevant industry") and the Minister of Economy,
Trade and Industry, where it is found necessary to initiate an investigation, shall notify
each other of that fact. The Minister of Finance, the Minister in charge of the relevant
industry and the Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry shall keep in close contact
with each other (including forwarding from the Minister of Finance to the Minister in
charge of the relevant industry and the Minister of Economy, Trade and industry copies
of documents submitted pursuant to paragraph (1) to (5) of Article 7 and paragraph (1)
of Article 14) with respect to the investigation (including the handling of the results of
the investigation) and the undertaking offered in accordance with paragraph (7) of
Article 8 of the Act, and any determination on important matters involved shall be made
after consulting with each other.
WT/TPR/M/310/Add.1

- 5 -

3.1.7 Standards and other technical requirements
Page 35, 3.40

Question

What 'requirements in Japan' necessitate individual standards for Japanese electric fans, rice
cookers, etc., that are different from international standards?

RESPONSE

Regarding Japanese electric fans and Japanese rice cookers, there are no corresponding
international standards for performance, therefore Japan have established JIS for
performance.

You could see details in following JIS standards:
Japanese electric fans: JIS C 9601
Japanese rice cookers: JIS C 9212

3.1.8 Labelling and packaging requirements
Page 40, paragraph 3.56

Australia notes that there are different origin labelling requirements for imported and domestically
produced food.

Question

Could Japan confirm that imported processed foods do not require labelling of place of origin of the
ingredients, and if so:

- are there plans to revise this policy in the near future?

RESPONSE

Among the processed food domestically produced and sold, Japan requires labelling of
place of origin of the ingredients for the main ingredients (50% and more) of processed
food that undergoes relatively minimum processing and not substantially changed from
their raw or unprocessed form. As for now, there is no plan to revise this policy to
require the same labelling for imported processed food.

Question

What purposes are intended to be served by the requirement for labelling the place of origin of
ingredients in domestically produced food, and

- what sorts of processes must be carried out (and their associated costs) to keep track of
the origin of ingredients and to make changes to labels?
- do these processes and costs deter producers from switching the source of ingredients?

RESPONSE

The purpose of the labelling of place of origin of the processed food ingredients is to
properly provide the information on product quality and not to mislead consumers
regarding the place of origin of the processed food ingredients in order to help
consumers make an appropriate food choice.

If producers label the place of origin of the ingredients, they must know the origin of
ingredients. When the origin of ingredients changes, the labelling needs to be changed.

The item of food subject to this standard have been decided in consideration of
feasibility of producers. We believe that this standard does not deter producers from
switching the source of ingredients.
WT/TPR/M/310/Add.1

- 6 -

3.1.10 Government procurement
Page 41, 3.1.10

Question

Can Japan outline what procurement policies are in place to specifically promote and engender
innovation activities?

RESPONSE

The Government of Japan founded the Cross-ministerial Strategic Innovation Promotion
and Impulsing Paradigm Change through the Disruptive Technologies Program to
promote innovation activities, especially in the field of science and technology. However,
specific procurement policy for the promotion of innovation activities is not stipulated in
these programs.

3.3.2 Subsidies and support
Page 53, 3.112

Question

Can Japan please specify what is meant by 'further support in some prefectures for local
purchases'?

RESPONSE

With regard to fuel cell vehicles, the Government of Japan recognizes that some
prefectures will plan to introduce a subsidy to consumers who purchase vehicles
powered by fuel cells.

3.3.3 State-owned enterprises
Page 53, Paragraph 3.117

Question

Could Japan please provide information on the reasons for a number of "emergency" butter
imports by the Agriculture and Livestock Industries Corporation (ALIC) in 2014?

- How are these emergency butter imports calculated into Japan's Current Access quota?
- Has ALIC's role as an importer of dairy products been declining in 2013-2014, as
suggested in Table 3.14 (p. 54)?

RESPONSE

- The quantity of emergency butter imports is not included in Japan's Current Access
quota import. (Japanese government uses the word 'additional import' instead of
'emergency import.')
- ALIC's role as an importer of dairy products has not been changed. The quantity of dairy
products import by ALIC in 2014 Japanese Fiscal Year increased compared to 2013 JFY.

3.3.5.2 Patents
Page 62, 3.140

The Government of Japan provides support for SMEs on acquisition of IPR through two initiatives
(i) consultation services on expansion into foreign markets; and (ii) subsidising fees and costs on
filing foreign directed applications (e.g. subsidising PCT application costs when filed in Japanese
(as distinct from actually being Japanese based SMEs)).
WT/TPR/M/310/Add.1

- 7 -

Question

Based on Japan's experiences in seeking to assist and support SMEs acquire IPR and expand into
foreign markets, could they please inform if these initiatives:

- have been widely adopted and utilised by SMEs; and
- if there have been measured increases in SMEs expanding into foreign markets based on
these initiatives.

RESPONSE

The number which utilized support measures is as follows:

- IP comprehensive support counters: about 150,000 (FY2013) (About 4% of the
total consultation numbers is related to overseas expansions)
- Subsidy for Filing Foreign Applications: about 380 (FY2013)
- Reduction for search fee under the PCT: about 330 (Apr. 2014-Dec. 2014).

The government of Japan has not grasped the number of SMEs expanding into foreign
markets based on these initiatives.

Trade Policies by Sector
4.1.2.1 Legal and institutional framework
Page 72, Paragraph 4.13

Question

Could Japan please provide additional information on its agricultural policy of food self-sufficiency
and whether this policy measure has led to increased productivity and a more efficient allocation of
resources?

- Is Japan planning to revise its food self-sufficiency targets and can it provide an update
regarding its consideration of establishing an index for food self-sufficiency capability.

RESPONSE

The Japanese government has promoted production of the crops in demand such as rice
for feed, wheat, soybeans as well as expanding consumption of domestic agricultural,
forestry, and fishery products in order to improve Japan's food self-sufficiency ratio
under the 3rd Basic Plan for Food, Agriculture and Rural Areas decided by the Cabinet
in 2010 based on the Food, Agriculture, Rural Areas Basic Act. However, the amount of
production of these crops has not increased considerably, while the consumption of rice
has fallen steadily. Therefore, the Japanese government evaluated the present target
last year, and will revise the target of food self-sufficiency ratio in the 4th Basic Plan
which will be updated this March, taking the result of evaluation into account.

Japan will also indicate food self-sufficiency potential indices as "the potential of
domestic agriculture, forestry, and fishery to produce food" in the 4th Basic plan which
will be decided this March.
WT/TPR/M/310/Add.1

- 8 -

4.1.2.2 Trade policies
Page 74, Paragraph 4.22

Question

Can Japan please provide a list and brief description of all programs currently provided by the
Nippon Export and Investment Insurance agency (NEXI) to assist agricultural exporters; and for
each of the programs under NEXI, could Japan confirm the following:

- the current maximum tenor length available;
- the current average tenor length;
- whether any tenors are less than 180 days.

RESPONSE

The maximum usance period:

- Export Credit Insurance - 2 years (We do offer an insurance product for
transactions with the usance period of 2 years or more, but in practice we
have had no such case.)
- Export Bill Insurance - 720 days
- Export Credit Insurance for SMEs - 180 days.

The average tenor length for FY 2012:

- Export Credit Insurance - 43 days
- Export Bill Insurance - 62 days
- Export Credit Insurance for SMEs - 54 days.

Australia understands that in 2012, NEXI provided official export financial support for
JPY 11,145,639,530 worth of agricultural exports.

Question

Could Japan please provide the following information:

- advise the percentage of total Japanese agricultural exports (in 2013 and 2014) that
were exported with NEXI-provided financial support (excluding fish products) in 2013
and 2014;
- a breakdown by product and by program against the total JPY 11,145,639,500 exports
provided with NEXI financial support in 2012; and
- the top 10 export destinations for agricultural products supported by NEXI in 2012.
RESPONSE

The percentage of total Japanese agricultural exports in 2013 and 2014 that were
exported with NEXI-provided financial support:

- FY 2013 - 2.9%
Total agricultural exports - JPY 313,058 million (source: Ministry of Agriculture,
Forestry and Fisheries of Japan)
NEXI-provided financial support: JPY 9,121million

- FY 2014 - No data available.

A breakdown by product and by program: please see Attachment 1.

The top 10 export destinations for agricultural products supported by NEXI: please see
Attachment 2.
WT/TPR/M/310/Add.1

- 9 -

Attachment 1
Underwritten amont by export of
Products （HS code）
agricultural products （Japanese yen）
21 Misc. edible preparations 4,228,126,802
19 Preps. of cereals, flour, starch or milk 2,264,919,087
22 Beverages, spirits & vinegar 1,872,546,282
50 Silk, inc. yarns & woven fabrics thereof 444,656,816
13 Lac, gums, resins, etc. 385,783,792
9 Coffee, tea, mate & spices 334,917,727
12 Milling industry products 282,315,772
11 Milling industry products 242,190,894
16 Ed. prep. of meat, fish, crustaceans, etc. 208,172,781
20 Preps of vegs, fruits, nuts, etc. 193,379,571
17 Sugars & sugar confectionery 146,678,470
15 Animal or vegetable fats, oils & waxes 138,230,834
35 Albuminoidal sub, starches, glues, enzymes 123,638,951
52 Cotton, inc. yarns & woven fabrics thereof 87,715,457
8 Ed. fruits & nuts, peel of citrus/melons 63,874,840
7 Edible vegetables 50,150,644
10 Cereals 23,371,818
23 Residues from food industries, animal feed 21,302,443
4 Dairy, eggs, honey, & ed. products 13,998,560
18 Cocoa & cocoa preparations 13,282,779
2 Meat & edible meat offal 5,969,591
5 Dairy, eggs, honey, & ed. products 415,619
Total 11,145,639,530

Underwritten amount by export of
Type of Insurance
agricultural products （Japanese yen）
Export Credit Insurance 9,815,051,676
Export Bill Insurance 1,249,134,341
Export Credit Insurance for SMEs 81,453,513
Total 11,145,639,530

Attachment 2
Underwritten amont by export of
Country
agricultural products （Japanese Yen）
Hong Kong, China 2,029,074,600
Australia 1,292,213,417
Malaysia 1,180,510,447
Singapore 865,932,010
Chinese Taipei 764,243,916
China 737,046,634
UK 623,221,073
USA 516,203,736
Thailand 420,541,154
Netherlands 368,921,336

Page 74, Paragraph 4.23

Question

Can Japan confirm it has a policy of providing food assistance on an untied and cash-basis only?

- If this is the case, how does Japan operate its 'Counterpart Funds' system, whereby
recipient countries are permitted to monetise in-kind food aid originating from Japan?

RESPONSE

In accordance with Article 5 of the Food Assistance Convention, Japan makes an annual
commitment of food assistance and provides funds for purchasing products. Japan does
not provide food assistance in-kind.
WT/TPR/M/310/Add.1

- 10 -

Question

Could Japan advise what percentage of its overseas food assistance was sourced from imports,
including Minimum Access rice, in 2014?

RESPONSE

The ratio of imports sourced from Japan's food assistance, including Minimum Access
rice in 2013 (Data for 2014 is being compiled) was 2.9%.

4.1.2.3.1 General support programmes
Page 75, Paragraph 4.30

Question

Could Japan provide additional information on a new direct payment for 'multifunctionality', or a
'Japanese-style direct payment', due to be introduced from April 2015?

RESPONSE

'Japanese-style direct payment' will be given a legislative basis by the 'Act on the
Promotion of Multiple Functions of Agriculture', which comes into force on April 1 2015.
Multifunctional Payment, Direct Payment to Farmers in the Hilly and Mountainous Areas
and Direct Payment for Environmentally Friendly Farming are defined by the Act.

The Multifunctional Payment is a new scheme introduced in 2014, which replaced the
Measures to Conserve and Improve Land, Water, and the Environment which had been in
place since 2007. The new scheme extends support to basic activities of farmers to
maintain farmland, irrigation facilities and farm roads.

Question

Could Japan provide additional information on the programme, 'Direct Payment for
Environmentally Friendly Farming', and explain how these direct payments are used to mitigate
global warming and increase biodiversity?

- Can Japan please provide the definition of 'biodiversity' in the context of this particular
programme?
- Is the 'Direct Payment for Environmentally Friendly Farming' programme considered to
be part of the multi-functionality approach to agricultural assistance in Japan?

RESPONSE

'Japanese-style direct payment' will be given a legislative basis by the 'Act on the
Promotion of Multiple Functions of Agriculture', which comes into force on April 1 2015.
Multifunctional Payment, Direct Payment to Farmers in the Hilly and Mountainous Areas
and Direct Payment for Environmentally Friendly Farming are defined by the Act.

The Multifunctional Payment is a new scheme introduced in 2014, which replaced the
Measures to Conserve and Improve Land, Water, and the Environment which had been in
place since 2007. The new scheme extends support to basic activities of farmers to
maintain farmland, irrigation facilities and farm roads.

4.1.2.3.2 Rice
Page 75, paragraph 4.35

Question

Could Japan provide additional information on the 31.3% increase in subsidies paid to farmers for
rice for animal feed, effective from April 2014?