The Advertising Law Japan Compliance Audit reviews your marketing texts for evidence requirements and compliance risks under Japanese law. Your marketing claim says “Industry-Leading Technology.” In Europe, that is confident positioning. In Japan, it is a compliance risk — unless you can prove it. Unlike China, strong claims are not categorically prohibited in Japan: the Japanese Consumer Affairs Agency (CAA) demands evidence. The burden of proof lies entirely with you. In 2023/24 alone, the CAA issued 44 enforcement orders — 13 of them for number-one claims. The highest fine: 1.65 billion yen. In addition, companies are publicly named on the CAA website and in daily newspapers, causing lasting reputational damage in Japan’s trust-based business culture.
| Superlatives and Number-One Claims | “No. 1,” “best,” “leading,” “first,” “unique” — generally permissible, but only with an independent study as evidence, no more than 12 months old. Without proof: HIGH risk. |
| Comparative Claims | “better than,” “faster,” “more effective” — only permissible with objective criteria and reproducible methodology. Subjective comparisons without a basis are not allowed. |
| Efficacy Claims | “works,” “helps with,” “protects” — require scientific evidence for the claimed effect. Particularly critical for health and beauty products. |
| Testimonials | “Recommended by,” “According to experts” — only permissible with a verifiable source and representative results. Individual opinions may not be presented as general statements. |
| Price Comparisons | “Was X, now Y,” “X% discount,” “Sale” — subject to the 50% rule and the two-week rule. False or misleading price statements are actively enforced. |
| Paid Partnerships | Influencer posts and sponsored content must be clearly labelled as advertising since October 2023. Missing labelling constitutes a violation, regardless of platform. |
| Marketing Teams | Teams launching campaigns for the Japanese market who want to ensure their claims are substantiated and compliant before materials go live. |
| Product Managers | Product managers bringing products to the Japanese market who want product descriptions, packaging texts, and technical claims reviewed for compliance. |
| Legal & Compliance | Legal and compliance departments reviewing Japan materials before sign-off who need a documented basis for internal approval processes. |
| Agencies | Agencies creating content for clients with a Japan presence who want to offer their clients an additional compliance review layer. |
| E-Commerce | Companies selling to consumers via Japanese platforms, where product descriptions and claims are directly subject to CAA oversight. |
Complete documentation of all identified claims with risk assessment, evidence requirements, and a clear status per claim: approved, revision required, or to be rejected.
For every high-risk claim, a concrete checklist: what evidence the CAA expects, what requirements apply to studies and sources, and what counts as sufficient proof.
For claims without sufficient evidence, we develop legally sound alternatives that preserve your marketing impact as far as possible: ready to use without further revision.
A complete audit trail for your compliance records: as a foundation for internal approval processes and as evidence in the event of a CAA inquiry.
| Step 1: Identification | We scan your materials systematically for trigger words and claim types subject to evidence requirements: website texts, product descriptions, advertisements, brochures. |
| Step 2: Classification | Each claim is categorised and risk-rated: HIGH (evidence mandatory) or MEDIUM (review recommended). Classification follows current CAA enforcement practice. |
| Step 3: Evidence Requirements | For each high-risk claim, we formulate specific questions about supporting documents: what study is available, how old is it, and what methodology was used. |
| Step 4: Assessment | We review provided evidence against Japanese legal requirements and assess whether it would withstand scrutiny in the event of a CAA review. |
| Step 5: Recommendation | Approval, alternative formulation, or labelling requirement: every decision with a concrete rationale and a directly actionable recommendation. |
| Step 6: Documentation | A complete audit trail for your compliance records: as internal protection and as evidence in the event of a CAA inquiry. |
| Original Claim | “Japan’s No. 1 Industrial Robot Manufacturer” |
| Risk Assessment | HIGH. Number-one claims require under Japanese law an independent study with documented methodology, no more than 12 months old. Without this evidence, the claim is not permissible. |
| Evidence Question | Is there an independent study documenting market leadership in the Japanese industrial robot segment, with documented methodology and a survey date within the last 12 months? |
| If No Evidence Available | Alternative: “One of Japan’s leading industrial robot manufacturers” or “Trusted by over 500 Japanese companies.” Both formulations are permissible without a study and preserve the positioning impact. |
| Marketing Impact | The alternative preserves the credibility positioning without the prohibited superlative and is often more effective than an absolute number-one claim in Japan’s trust-based business culture. |
B2B Communication
We understand business communication, not just cultural theory
Direct access to specialists, personal project support
No. The Compliance Audit is based on our localisation expertise and our understanding of Japanese advertising law. It does not replace legal advice. For a definitive legal assessment, we recommend consulting a lawyer specialising in Japanese advertising law. Our Audit provides you with the linguistic and substantive foundation for that.
We review source texts (German or English) and/or existing Japanese translations, depending on what is available. Typical materials include website texts, product descriptions, advertisements, brochures, and campaign copy. Not included is correction through new translations or transcreation — these are available as separate services.
After receiving your materials, we provide an effort estimate within 2 working days. The compliance report follows as a rule within 5 to 10 working days, depending on the volume of materials and the complexity of the claims under Japan’s advertising regulations.
We work on an hourly basis. Typical project sizes range from 4 to 15 hours depending on material volume and claim complexity. We provide the exact effort estimate after reviewing your materials.
The key difference lies in the legal logic. In China, superlatives and absolute statements are categorically prohibited. In Japan, strong claims are generally permissible but only with appropriate evidence. The burden of proof lies entirely with you. The Japan Audit therefore assesses not only whether a claim is problematic, but also whether your existing evidence would withstand the requirements of the Consumer Affairs Agency (CAA).
Chinese advertising law follows a different logic from Japanese: superlatives are categorically prohibited, not subject to evidence requirements. The same audit process for the Chinese market.
Advertising Law China Compliance Audit
When your core messages need to be not only compliant but also culturally effective: transcreation develops new Japanese formulations that are legally sound and brand-strong.
Transcreation
Check whether your brand communicates consistently across all Asian markets, with backtranslation analysis and a style guide framework.
Brand Consistency Audit
Find out in a free introductory call: 30 minutes, no obligation, by video or phone.
Book Your Initial Consultation
or
+49 30 2089859 00
info@yabylon.com