Japan's three EPI issuance routes · overview of trust, bank and funds-transfer-provider models

ConfidenceCertainUpdated2026-07-30Review by2026-09-22Sources3Machine-translatedOriginal (JA)

On this page

Wiki route

This entry sits under fintech index. Read it with Japan’s financial regulation — legal framework for tokens, crypto-assets and payments for adjacent context and Japan’s three-tier stablecoin legal framework (JPYC, USDC and Project Pax) for the broader system boundary.

[!info] TL;DR Effective from 2023-06 the amended Payment Services Act established a framework for fiat-linked electronic payment instruments and for electronic payment instrument service providers that intermediate them. Banks, funds-transfer providers, trust companies and similar entities are contemplated as issuance routes, but limits, redemption and user protection differ by governing law, registration category and product design. A project announcement alone does not prove that a product has been issued or an entity registered.

Key facts

  • Enactment in 2022-06 and commencement in 2023-06 established the framework for electronic payment instruments.
  • An electronic payment instrument’s issuance route is distinct from registration for purchase, exchange and management by an electronic payment instrument service provider.
  • Funds-transfer providers have Type I, Type II and Type III categories; amount limits cannot be summarized for every product as a uniform “100 万円 / 件” (one million yen per transaction).
  • Specific examples of trust, bank and funds-transfer-provider models should be confirmed through the FSA registration lists, issuer disclosures, and the application of trust, banking and funds-transfer laws.

Mechanism / How it works

Comparison of EPI issuance routes:

The table below organizes the framework based on the FSA materials on electronic payment instruments and the Payment Services Act. For the issuance and registration status of a specific product, prioritize the latest FSA list and issuer disclosures.

Issuance route Issuing entity Main legal framework Amount / distribution conditions Treatment of examples
Trust model Trust company, trust bank or similar entity Trust Business Act / Act on Engagement in Trust Business by a Financial Institution, and electronic payment instruments under the Payment Services Act Follows the trust property, redemption terms and beneficial-interest design. Do not make a blanket claim of “no limit” For Progmat and similar cases, distinguish the concept / platform from actual issuance projects
Bank model Bank Banking Act and electronic payment instruments under the Payment Services Act Follows the bank liability, product terms and supervisory requirements Do not equate a published experiment or plan with commercial issuance
Funds-transfer-provider model Registered funds-transfer provider Payment Services Act (Type I, Type II and Type III) Differs by category, retention rules, performance security and product terms For JPYC and similar cases, check the latest registration and product disclosures

These three categories are legal issuance routes based on the issuing entity. They do not automatically determine a particular chain, customer group, circulation amount or governance ratio. Verify Progmat, bank experiments and JPYC against the latest issuance, registration and product materials for each.

Origin & evolution

The amendment concerning electronic payment instruments was enacted in 2022-06 and took effect in 2023-06 together with the related government orders and supervisory guidelines. See the FSA notice for the history of the framework and current materials. For each project, distinguish a concept announcement, the issuer’s eligibility under its governing law, registration of an intermediary, and actual product issuance; track these through the latest FSA lists and company disclosures.

Sources

#fintech#law#regulation#japan#stablecoin#epi

Discovery

Keep reading

Related

Read next

Links here