Three changes to Japanese child support took effect on 1 April 2026. Which of them you can use depends on when you divorced, and the answer is different for each one. Almost every English-language summary we have read gets this wrong by treating the date as a single switch.
Start here: which changes reach back, and which do not
| Divorced before 1 April 2026 | Divorced on or after 1 April 2026 | |
|---|---|---|
| Statutory child support (a fixed monthly amount where nothing was agreed) | Not available | Available |
| Statutory lien (enforcement without a court order or notarial deed) | Available — for instalments falling due on or after 1 April 2026, even under an agreement made years ago | Available |
| Property division claim window | 2 years, as before | 5 years |
The middle row is the one worth your attention. The lien reaches back into old arrangements. If you have a written agreement from 2019 that has been ignored since 2023, the instalments that fall due from April 2026 onward are within it. Almost nobody is writing about this.
Statutory child support: a fixed amount where nothing was agreed
Where parents divorced without agreeing anything about the cost of raising the child, the parent who has continued to be the child’s main carer since the divorce can claim a monthly amount set by ministerial ordinance — ¥20,000 per child per month — from the other parent (Civil Code art. 766-3).
It is not limited to divorce by agreement. The provision is written for consensual divorce, but it is applied to judicial divorce through art. 771 and to cases of acknowledgement of paternity through art. 788. Mediated divorce is treated the same way.
When it runs. From the day of the divorce, payable at the end of each month, until the earliest of:
- the day the parents agree terms for the cost of the child’s care (a mediation agreement counts);
- the day an adjudication on those costs becomes final;
- the day the child reaches the age of majority — 18.
The first and last months are calculated pro rata by days.
Three things people get wrong about this.
It is not “child support in Japan is ¥20,000”. This is a stopgap for the situation where nothing was agreed. An amount fixed by agreement or by the court is a separate thing, and the family court’s practice on how long ordinary child support runs — often to 20, or to the end of university — is unchanged. Only the statutory amount stops at 18.
It is not automatic. The paying parent can refuse to pay, in whole or in part, by proving either that they lack the means to pay, or that paying would leave their own living severely straitened. The family court can also order all or part of it forgiven or postponed when it sets or varies child support (art. 766-3(3)).
There is no clawback. If the amount later agreed or ordered is lower than what has already been paid as statutory support, there is no provision for repayment.
The statutory lien: the change that reaches backwards
Child support claims now carry a general statutory lien (Civil Code arts. 306(iii) and 308-2), capped at ¥80,000 per month per child. Because the statutory amount above is ¥20,000, it sits entirely within the cap.
What this means in practice: you can apply to seize the other parent’s salary without first obtaining a court judgment or a notarial deed. Instead of a debt title, you file documents proving the lien exists.
Here is where we have to be careful with you, because the marketing version of this is misleading.
The standard is proof, not a plausible showing. The Tokyo District Court’s civil enforcement division has said that what is required is not “this is probably so” but establishment to a high degree of probability. One academic view argues for a lighter touch, on the basis that the legislature intended a procedure an ordinary person could use unaided. The court’s stated position is the one your application will meet.
What that means concretely. To establish a lien securing statutory child support you would expect to file:
- the family register (showing the divorce and that there is a minor child);
- a resident record for the whole household, showing that you have lived with the child continuously since the divorce — obtained within the previous three months;
- the register of addresses attached to the family register, if you have moved since;
- where the resident record does not show it — nursery or school correspondence, or a tenancy agreement listing the child as an occupant;
- where your address is withheld because of domestic violence — the certificate of receipt of the child-rearing allowance issued by your municipality.
A statement written by you alone is not enough. Nor are photographs of you with the child.
Where the lien secures an amount you agreed rather than the statutory amount, the document recording that agreement has to be proved genuine. A mediation record or an adjudication is a public document and speaks for itself. A private agreement does not:
- registered seal plus seal certificate — the strongest position, because it triggers the statutory presumption of authenticity;
- signature only — proved by comparison with the other parent’s handwriting on other documents, such as the divorce registration form;
- printed name only, with nothing to compare — you are down to emails, messages, and bank records of past payments, which the court examines carefully for forgery and for whether the agreement was final or provisional.
So the amendment has made a properly executed notarial deed more valuable, not less. The route that skips the court exists — and the evidence it demands is exactly the evidence a notarial deed already contains.
One application instead of three
Before April 2026, tracing and seizing a salary took three separate applications: disclosure of assets, obtaining employment information from a third party, then the seizure itself. Under art. 167-17 of the Civil Execution Act these now run from a single application.
It covers salary and nothing else. The information obtained is limited to salary; bank accounts and real estate are outside it. The seizure that follows is likewise limited to salary.
A trap worth knowing about. If you apply for asset disclosure using a maintenance-type claim, the one-stop provisions apply whether or not you intended to use them. Where the arrears are large and the money is more likely to be in a bank account than in wages, you have to state expressly that you do not want the one-stop route.
Court fees are ¥2,000 for the disclosure stage and ¥1,000 for the information stage. Enforcing the lien is ¥4,000 regardless of the number of children; filing on the lien and on a debt title together is two applications, so ¥8,000. The seizure fee falls due once the claim is identified.
The court does not collect the money for you. Unless the employer deposits it with the court, you collect it yourself, starting one week after the seizure order is served on the other parent.
What none of this answers when the other parent is outside Japan
We have read the Japanese legal commentary on these amendments — the Tokyo Family Court’s commentary, the Tokyo District Court enforcement division’s guidance, and the Ministry of Justice material. None of it addresses cross-border cases. So on the questions you are most likely to be asking, we will tell you what is uncertain rather than guess:
- The one-stop route works by asking municipalities what salary information they hold. Whether such a record exists for a foreign national, or for someone who has recently arrived or left, is not something we can promise in advance.
- Whether a Japanese order can be enforced where the other parent now lives depends on that country. Some have treaty arrangements with Japan; others do not.
- Where the other parent is abroad and has no assets in Japan, a Japanese order has to be recognised there before it does anything.
Where enforcement abroad is in question, we will tell you what we can and cannot establish, and where local counsel in the other country is needed. We will not tell you a Japanese order will be enforceable somewhere we cannot confirm that it will.
Where you are now
Divorced on or after 1 April 2026 with nothing agreed. Statutory child support may be running already, from the day of the divorce. It stops the moment you agree an amount, so the sequencing matters.
Divorced before April 2026 with an agreement that is being ignored. The lien does not revive the arrears from before April 2026, but it reaches the instalments falling due since. What you can do with it depends on how that agreement was documented.
Not divorced yet. How the agreement is executed decides how it is enforced. That is a decision made once, at the outset — and the one that is expensive to have got wrong.
Read next: Joint custody in Japan — what the 2026 law says for foreign parents · Is a Japanese divorce by agreement valid in your country?
Yusuke Sasaki handles these matters in English. The first 30 minutes are at no charge.
The Civil Code and Civil Execution Act provisions referred to on this page can be read in Japanese at e-Gov. This page describes the law in general terms and is not advice on your situation.