This preparation package is for the fixed assets tax subject of the Japanese tax accountant (zeirishi) examination, using written open-response practice and supporting MCQs that check knowledge rather than simulate the written paper. It covers liability, classification, calculation, and professional judgment, while treating fixed assets tax as a local tax generally administered by municipalities, with a possible prefectural portion for large-scale depreciable assets. Current rates, thresholds, exemptions, deadlines, review procedures, exam format, and availability are subject review and must be confirmed with the relevant municipality and the named issuing body. Do not rely on this guide for unsupported proration, fee, pass-mark, or exam-format rules. Anchor every answer on January 1, municipality, asset category, and stated inputs; show calculations and verify current law rather than memorizing unsupported numbers.
What this subject tests
The paper tests liability, classification, calculation, and professional judgment in an open-response format.
This preparation package is for the fixed assets tax subject of the Japanese tax accountant (zeirishi) examination. The practice format is written and open-response, with calculations and explanations; the exact current paper structure, weighting, and availability are subject review and should be confirmed with the issuing body. The supporting MCQs check knowledge and application only. They are not a simulation of the written examination, and they do not replace open-task practice.
Fixed assets tax is generally a local tax administered by municipalities on land, houses, and depreciable assets. Large-scale depreciable assets can have a prefectural portion under the statutory framework, so avoid reducing the whole subject to a single municipal calculation. The core exam skill is to identify the correct taxpayer, asset category, municipal unit, valuation base, and procedural route before computing.
Skill map and priority order
Build liability and classification before calculation speed.
The tested skills are linked. Foundations cover the nature of the tax, the January 1 levy date, and local administration. Classification separates land, houses, and depreciable assets and tests conditional exemptions. Calculation applies stated values, thresholds, reductions, and rates within the correct municipal unit. Professional judgment covers assessment review, disaster relief, shared property, and multi-municipality advice.
Prioritize in this order: (1) levy-date and ownership analysis; (2) asset and exemption classification; (3) municipal aggregation; (4) formula discipline; (5) written explanation; (6) procedural judgment. Do not start with rate memorization. A candidate who calculates quickly but picks the wrong owner or municipality will still lose the marks.
For threshold analysis, aggregate at the level the governing rule requires. Do not combine all municipalities into one nationwide total. For the fixed assets tax exemption threshold, however, each ward of a designated city is treated as a municipality under Local Tax Law Article 351(2); test Z市's a区 and b区 holdings ward by ward rather than combining them citywide. Confirm any other special statutory rule in current official guidance.
January 1, municipality, and ownership
The levy date is the first anchor; the municipal boundary is the second.
Fixed assets tax analysis begins with the asset, its location, and the owner or holder on January 1. A later sale, move, or registration change is a separate issue. It may matter for a later year or for a specific relief, but it does not automatically replace the January 1 starting point. Check the statutory registration and possession rules rather than choosing the contract date.
Original scenario: On January 1, A owns land in City P and a house in City Q. A sells the house on February 2. For the current year, begin with A's January 1 position and the statutory owner rules. The February sale does not by itself shift the year's liability or merge the two municipalities. State the rule, apply the dates, and note any fact that requires verification.
Shared property needs its own discipline. Determine each co-owner's share, the asset category, and the location. Special rules can apply to the exemption test on shared property, so do not simply merge every co-owner's other holdings into one global total without checking the rule. A safe answer states the share, the municipal unit, and the exact aggregation assumption.
Classification and exemptions
Classify first, then prove every exemption condition.
A house is a building assessed in the house category. Machinery, tools, vehicles, and business equipment are generally analysed as depreciable assets if they meet the statutory conditions. Land is separate. Misclassifying an item changes the threshold, valuation base, and sometimes the municipal allocation. Name the category before calculating.
Exemptions are conditional. A label such as 'religious corporation', 'school', or 'public use' is not enough. Ask who owns or holds the asset on January 1, what the asset is actually used for, whether the statutory designation or purpose is satisfied, and whether an application or certification is required. Exact conditions and deadlines are subject review.
Original scenario: A company owns a building and leases it to a school. The lease does not by itself prove exemption. Check the owner, actual use, statutory category, and required qualification. Conversely, a building owned by a religious corporation is not automatically exempt merely because of the owner's identity; the worship-related use and statutory conditions must be established. Write two lines for every exemption issue: condition required, and fact proving or failing it.
Calculation mechanics and worked examples
Use a repeatable worksheet: asset, location, owner, category, threshold, reduction, tax.
Basic formula: tax = assessed value × rate, after any stated threshold or reduction. Example: assessed value 8,000,000 yen; stated rate 1.4%; tax = 8,000,000 × 0.014 = 112,000 yen. Write the formula before substituting numbers; this catches unit errors and makes partial credit easier.
Municipal separation: City A taxable value 900,000 yen; City B taxable value 1,200,000 yen. Assume a 1,000,000-yen threshold applies separately in each municipality and the rate is 1.4%. City A is below the threshold, so tax is 0. City B is above, so tax = 1,200,000 × 0.014 = 16,800 yen. Do not combine the cities into 2,100,000 yen and apply one threshold.
Aggregation: a taxpayer owns depreciable assets of 400,000 yen and 500,000 yen in one municipality. Assume a 1,000,000-yen municipal threshold. Aggregate first: 900,000 yen, so tax is 0. If the values are 400,000 yen and 700,000 yen, the aggregate is 1,100,000 yen; tax = 1,100,000 × 0.014 = 15,400 yen. The threshold and rate are hypothetical inputs.
Reduction: a building is assessed at 5,000,000 yen. Assume a 1.4% rate and a 20% reduction for the qualifying use. Full tax = 5,000,000 × 0.014 = 70,000 yen. After the 20% reduction, 70,000 × 80% = 56,000 yen. State whether the reduction applies to the value or to the tax if the exercise is ambiguous. Do not teach monthly proration of newly acquired depreciable assets as a verified rule; use a proration rule only when a current official source or the question expressly supplies it.
Common errors
Most lost marks are structural, not arithmetic.
Frequent errors include combining municipalities; failing to test each ward of a designated city separately for the fixed assets tax exemption threshold; mixing land, houses, and depreciable assets before applying thresholds; applying a threshold before aggregating within the correct unit; using December 31 or the contract date instead of January 1; assuming a move-out automatically cancels the year's tax; treating a lease to a school or religious body as automatic exemption; ignoring co-ownership shares; and using a rate, threshold, or exemption percentage that was not stated or verified.
In written answers, another cluster appears: no formula, no municipal unit, no category label, no explanation of shared property, and a conclusion without application. Avoid answering only 'exempt' or only a number. State the rule, the facts, and the calculation trail. If a fact is missing, say what must be verified and how it changes the result.
Integrated practice task
Complete one open task that combines liability, classification, calculation, and advice.
On January 1, Client owns land L in City A with an assessed value of 2,000,000 yen; house H in City A with an assessed value of 6,000,000 yen; depreciable machines in City A worth 700,000 yen; and depreciable machines in City B worth 1,300,000 yen. Assume a 1.4% rate, a separate 500,000-yen threshold for land, a separate 500,000-yen threshold for houses, and a 1,000,000-yen depreciable-asset threshold per municipality. Client sells house H on February 1. In August, a flood damages house H. In September, Client receives a notice increasing land L's assessed value and asks what to do.
Calculation: Land L in City A: 2,000,000 × 1.4% = 28,000 yen. House H in City A: 6,000,000 × 1.4% = 84,000 yen. Depreciable assets in City A: 700,000 is below 1,000,000, so 0. Depreciable assets in City B: 1,300,000 × 1.4% = 18,200 yen. Total = 28,000 + 84,000 + 0 + 18,200 = 130,200 yen. The February sale does not automatically replace the January 1 analysis; discuss the statutory owner or holder rule. The flood requires prompt documentation and checking whether a disaster reduction or exemption applies, with the required municipal application and deadline. The valuation notice requires checking the statutory review route, deadline, and evidence; do not alter the notice or ignore payment without advice.
Self-check rubric, 0–2 points per item: (1) correct January 1 anchor; (2) correct asset categories; (3) correct municipal separation; (4) correct aggregation within each municipality; (5) correct formula and arithmetic; (6) correct treatment of stated thresholds; (7) explicit statement that a later sale does not automatically decide the year's liability; (8) disaster relief identified as conditional and procedural; (9) review route identified without inventing deadlines; (10) clear written explanation. A score of 16–20 is strong; 11–15 needs targeted repair; below 11, redo liability and classification before timing yourself. All numbers and thresholds in this task are teaching inputs, not official current-law assertions.
Study sequence and exam routine
Use a short cycle: map, drill, calculate, write, review.
Week 1: build a one-page map of liability, classification, municipal aggregation, thresholds, and professional-judgment topics. For each node, write the first question you should ask. Week 2: drill classification and exemption scenarios, including shared property, sale timing, religious use, educational use, and public use. Rewrite every wrong MCQ explanation in your own words.
Week 3: practise open calculations under a 30-minute timer. Use only stated rates and thresholds. After each attempt, compare your answer with the worksheet sequence: asset, location, owner, category, threshold, reduction, tax. Week 4: complete the integrated task and one timed written response. If the current paper uses a two-question, two-hour structure, verify it first and allocate roughly half the time to each 50-point question, leaving time for calculation checks and clear conclusions.
In the exam hall, read the call of the question before reading every fact. Mark the levy date, municipality, asset category, ownership event, and requested output. For calculations, show the formula and intermediate aggregation. For advice questions, give the procedural next step and the fact that must be verified. Do not pad with unsupported numbers; a disciplined, rule-aware answer is more credible than a confident guess.
References and further reading
Use these references to explore the concepts and check the latest information from the relevant organizations.