Japan reassesses land for fixed asset tax only once every three years. The next base year is FY2027 (Reiwa 9), and its tax base will be land prices as of January 1, 2026. In the 2026 (Reiwa 8) Land Price Publication released by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT) in March, standard commercial sites in hotel clusters rose +13.1% YoY in Shinjuku, +19.3% in Asakusa, +15.9% in Osaka Kita and +35.2% in Hakuba Village. Those increases, however, will not land on FY2027 tax bills one-for-one. Between assessed value and tax sits a buffer called the burden adjustment measure, and how hard it bites depends on where the “burden level” stands today. This article tracks 346 standard commercial sites across 17 major hotel locations from 2020 onward and estimates, per room, three things: where the burden level stands in FY2026, how fast tax starts climbing the staircase after the FY2027 revaluation, and the time lag before price gains after January 2026 reach the tax bill.
Our earlier pieces covered the current level of holding taxes on hotels (per-room fixed asset tax and its drag on NOI yield) and, in “Japan 2027 Property Tax Revaluation: +30% Value, Only +11% Hotel Tax”, how much the 2023–2026 three-year change moves the tax bill. This article covers neither; it is about the timing of when the change arrives. The lag between a land price rise and the tax catching up comes from two layers, the valuation cycle and the burden adjustment, and depending on location it ranges from one year to seven. Read it as input for deciding how much to budget in which year while FY2027 budgets are being drawn up.
Metric Definitions Used in This Article
- ADR (average daily rate): an estimated settled rate (tax-excluded equivalent), derived by applying segment-specific correction factors to the lowest-plan rate each property publishes on major booking sites (2 guests per room, per-room price, tax included). Checked against property-level results disclosed by listed hotel REITs (91 properties, latest 3 months), the median error is about 7%. These are estimates and differ from each property’s actual settled rates and accounting figures. Area-level ADR is the median of the properties covered (the level of a typical property in the area). This article uses the 12-month average for October 2025–September 2026 (all finalized months).
- Published / benchmark land prices: prices (¥/sqm) of standard sites and benchmark sites in MLIT’s Land Price Publication (as of January 1 each year, released in March) and the prefectural Land Price Survey (as of July 1 each year, released in September). This article uses the median of commercial standard sites around each area center for which prices are available at the same site every year from 2020 to 2026.
- Fixed asset tax assessed value (land): a level targeted at about 70% of published land prices. The taxable base is the tax base after the burden adjustment measure. Burden level = prior-year taxable base ÷ current-year assessed value. Holding tax is estimated at 1.7% in total (standard rates): 1.4% fixed asset tax plus 0.3% city planning tax. Land only; buildings and depreciable assets are excluded.
- Estimates: tax amounts in this article are estimates based on public data and general valuation rules; actual tax depends on each municipality’s assessment and ordinances. Downward corrections in the FY2022 and FY2023 hold years are approximated using the following year’s published decline rates. Consult a tax accountant or other professional for decisions on individual deals.
- Data sources: MLIT “Real Estate Information Library (Land Price Publication / Land Price Survey)”, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications (MIC) notices, MetroEngines Research & Consulting
- — Burden level 66%→46%: commercial land in 17 major hotel locations sits at the low end of the hold zone in FY2026, and the FY2027 revaluation drops every area below 60% (est. median).
- — ¥1.4k–¥63.8k per room a year: the FY2026→FY2029 increase in land holding tax ranges from ¥1,400 in Hakuba to ¥63,800 in Shibuya (100-room model, land only). Hakuba leads in percentage terms (+59%); Shibuya leads in yen.
- — 7 of 17 areas do not reach the cap (60% of assessed value) by FY2029, so the 5-point staircase carries over into the next revaluation in FY2030.
- — Gains after the valuation date are not reflected in FY2027–FY2029: rises in January–July 2026 (+4.5% in the Tokyo area, etc.) enter assessed values only from FY2030.
- — 0.08–2.02% of NOI, with a yield impact of 0.006–0.263 pt. Even in a downside case for occupancy and GOP margin, Shibuya’s ratio to NOI stays at 2.67%.
The Revaluation Timeline — Land Prices on January 1, 2026 Set FY2027–FY2029
First, the framework, checked against MIC’s primary documents. Assessed values for land and buildings are reviewed in a base year every three years; the latest base year was FY2024 (Reiwa 6) and the next is FY2027 (Reiwa 9). The notice MIC issued ahead of the FY2024 revaluation (Sozeihyo No. 15, May 23, 2022) states the price survey date as “January 1, 2023 (Reiwa 5)” and provides that the market value of standard residential sites be set “at about 70% of published land prices, etc.”, using the 2023 Land Price Publication. Applying that precedent to FY2027, the price survey date would be January 1, 2026, with the 2026 Land Price Publication as the basis. The FY2027 notice itself could not be confirmed at the time of writing, so the final wording of the valuation date awaits MIC’s release.
The key point is that base-year prices are, in principle, held for the following two years (the second and third years). In those hold years values can be changed only when land prices fall: in a September 2021 notice (Sozeihyo No. 44), MIC called for applying a special provision that allows prices to be revised in hold years “where land prices have fallen and the mayor finds that this causes a marked imbalance for fixed asset tax purposes.” There is no revision for rises. In other words, a land price rise that occurs after January 1, 2026, however large, does not enter FY2027–FY2029 assessed values; it is carried over to the next base year, FY2030 (valuation date expected to be January 1, 2029).
| Base year | Price survey date | Underlying Land Price Publication | Tax years | Treatment in hold years |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| FY2024 (Reiwa 6) | January 1, 2023 | 2023 Land Price Publication (released March 2023) | FY2024, FY2025, FY2026 | FY2025 and FY2026 revised only on declines |
| FY2027 (Reiwa 9) | January 1, 2026 (expected, based on precedent) | 2026 Land Price Publication (released March 17, 2026) | FY2027, FY2028, FY2029 | FY2028 and FY2029 revised only on declines. Rises from the July 1, 2026 benchmark prices onward are not reflected |
| FY2030 (Reiwa 12) | January 1, 2029 (expected) | 2029 Land Price Publication | FY2030, FY2031, FY2032 | Reflects rises from January 2026 to January 2029 all at once |
Under this structure, the “valuation lag” before a land price rise reaches the tax bill is at least 15 months (a January 2026 price enters tax from April 2027) and can exceed four years (a rise in February 2026 passes through the January 2029 valuation date and enters FY2030). And once the assessed value moves, a second layer, the “taxable base lag” from the burden adjustment measure, is added on top. The next section looks at where that stands today.
Where the Burden Adjustment Stands — FY2026 Burden Levels Estimated at 60–69%
For commercial land (non-residential building sites), the taxable base is not simply the assessed value times the tax rate; it is set in three zones according to the burden level (prior-year taxable base ÷ current-year assessed value). The FY2027 local tax reform requests that MLIT and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) submitted to MIC summarize the current rule as follows: “where the burden level is 70% or more, 70% of the current-year assessed value; where it is 60% or more but less than 70%, held at the same amount as the prior-year taxable base; where it is less than 60%, the prior-year taxable base plus 5% of the current-year assessed value (capped at 60% and floored at 20% of assessed value)”. They ask for the expiry to be extended by three years from the current March 31, 2027 (Reiwa 9) to March 31, 2030 (Reiwa 12). Whether it is extended will be decided in the FY2027 tax reform outline at the end of 2026, so this article assumes the current rule continues; if the rule changes, the figures change.
Our earlier estimate assumed burden levels had converged at the 70% cap by FY2026. This article drops that assumption: it sets the burden level at 70% in FY2021 (valuation date January 1, 2020) and then tracks it site by site through the FY2024 revaluation and the downward corrections in hold years. The result is below: all 17 areas are below 70% in FY2026, and the two Fukuoka areas, Sapporo, Hakuba and Kutchan have fallen to around 60%.
Fukuoka Hakata is the telling case. Commercial land there rose +41.0% from 2020 to 2023, so right after the FY2024 revaluation the burden level fell to an estimated 49.6% and entered the zone that climbs 5 points a year. Land holding tax per room moved from ¥67,600 in FY2024 to ¥74,200 in FY2026; it is already climbing the staircase without waiting for the FY2027 revaluation. Tenjin follows the same pattern. By contrast, the four Tokyo areas, Kyoto and Naha saw small changes in 2020–2023 and were still in the 66–69% hold zone in FY2026.
Then comes the FY2027 revaluation. In the three years from January 2023 to January 2026, commercial land rose by anywhere from +21.2% in Tokyo Ginza to +134.3% in Hakuba, so the assessed value in the denominator swells everywhere at once. The burden level falls to a median of 46% across the 17 areas, and to 26% in Hakuba Village, the lowest. Every area enters the below-60% zone, where the taxable base builds up by “5% of assessed value” each year. From here, how the tax moves depends not on the rate of increase in assessed value but on “how many steps remain to the 60% cap.”
Land Price Map of 17 Hotel Locations — Where YoY Growth Is Accelerating and Slowing
We look by area at land price levels on the January 1, 2026 valuation date and at how growth accelerated over the three years leading up to it. Circle size on the map is the 2026 published price (commercial land, median of the same sites); color intensity is the YoY change in the 2026 publication.
Twelve areas saw YoY growth widen three years running in the 2024–2026 publications: the four Tokyo areas, both Osaka areas, both Kyoto areas, Naha, Hakuba, Kutchan and Karuizawa (Hakone-Yumoto, measured with survey benchmark sites, also widened). Conversely, Sapporo and the two Fukuoka areas peaked in the 2024 publication and Takayama in 2025, and their gains narrowed heading into 2026. MLIT’s summary likewise notes that commercial land in the 2026 publication accelerated to +9.3% in the Tokyo area and +7.3% in the Osaka area, while the four regional cities (Sapporo, Sendai, Hiroshima, Fukuoka) slowed to +6.4% from +7.4% the year before, consistent with our area measurements.
The July 1 Land Price Survey shows what happened after the valuation date. Six areas saw the 2026 survey’s YoY change exceed the 2026 publication’s, meaning growth kept accelerating after the valuation date: Tokyo Shinjuku, Tokyo Ginza, Tokyo Asakusa, Osaka Kita, Osaka Minami and Karuizawa. The other eleven areas turned to slowing: Tokyo Shibuya, Kyoto Shijo-Kawaramachi, Kyoto Station, Sapporo Susukino, Fukuoka Hakata, Fukuoka Tenjin, Naha Kokusai-dori, Hakuba, Kutchan, Takayama and Hakone-Yumoto. In MLIT’s half-year changes measured at 503 commercial sites common to the publication and the survey, prices rose in the second half (January–July 2026) by +4.5% in the Tokyo area, +3.8% in the Osaka area, +2.3% in the four regional cities and +1.4% elsewhere. As the mechanism in the previous section shows, this half year is not included in FY2027–FY2029 valuations.
| Area | Same sites | 2023 publication (¥/sqm) | 2026 publication (¥/sqm) | 3-year change | Designated FAR | Site area per room | Burden level FY2026 | Burden level FY2027 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tokyo Shinjuku | 31 | ¥2,480,000 | ¥3,340,000 | +34.7% | 600% | 6.4 sqm | 67.5% | 50.1% |
| Tokyo Ginza | 51 | ¥8,080,000 | ¥9,790,000 | +21.2% | 700% | 5.5 sqm | 69.0% | 57.0% |
| Tokyo Asakusa | 28 | ¥839,500 | ¥1,250,000 | +48.9% | 600% | 6.4 sqm | 66.3% | 44.5% |
| Tokyo Shibuya | 21 | ¥3,240,000 | ¥4,800,000 | +48.1% | 500% | 7.7 sqm | 67.4% | 45.5% |
| Osaka Kita | 40 | ¥1,465,000 | ¥2,280,000 | +55.6% | 600% | 6.4 sqm | 65.2% | 41.9% |
| Osaka Minami | 32 | ¥1,395,000 | ¥2,075,000 | +48.7% | 600% | 6.4 sqm | 67.0% | 45.0% |
| Kyoto Shijo-Kawaramachi | 39 | ¥1,070,000 | ¥1,410,000 | +31.8% | 400% | 9.6 sqm | 66.1% | 50.1% |
| Kyoto Station | 24 | ¥769,000 | ¥1,045,000 | +35.9% | 400% | 9.6 sqm | 68.2% | 50.2% |
| Sapporo Susukino | 19 | ¥705,000 | ¥1,100,000 | +56.0% | 600% | 6.4 sqm | 61.6% | 39.5% |
| Fukuoka Hakata | 16 | ¥1,350,000 | ¥1,955,000 | +44.8% | 500% | 7.7 sqm | 59.6% | 41.4% |
| Fukuoka Tenjin | 26 | ¥1,485,000 | ¥2,090,000 | +40.7% | 500% | 7.7 sqm | 60.0% | 42.6% |
| Naha Kokusai-dori | 10 | ¥492,500 | ¥608,500 | +23.6% | 400% | 9.6 sqm | 67.2% | 54.4% |
| Hakuba | 1 | ¥17,200 | ¥40,300 | +134.3% | 200% | 19.2 sqm | 60.0% | 25.6% |
| Kutchan | 1 | ¥130,000 | ¥181,000 | +39.2% | 300% | 12.8 sqm | 60.0% | 43.1% |
| Takayama | 3 | ¥256,000 | ¥368,000 | +43.8% | 300% | 12.8 sqm | 68.6% | 47.7% |
| Karuizawa | 2 | ¥118,500 | ¥158,900 | +34.1% | 200% | 19.2 sqm | 62.5% | 46.6% |
| Hakone-Yumoto | 2 | ¥251,500 | ¥350,000 | +39.2% | 350% | 11.0 sqm | 65.7% | 47.2% |
The Per-Room Land Holding Tax Staircase — From FY2026 to FY2029
Combining the rules with land prices, we line up the land holding tax per room for a 100-room hotel with 3,850 sqm of floor area (38.5 sqm per room, the same model as in our earlier articles). Site area is backed out by dividing floor area by each area’s median designated FAR; assessed value is 70% of the published price; and the taxable base is updated year by year from the previous section’s burden levels using the burden adjustment rules. The tax rate is 1.7% in total: 1.4% fixed asset tax plus 0.3% city planning tax.
The shapes of the six lines show the differences in lag directly. Fukuoka Hakata has been rising since FY2024, and the FY2027 revaluation only steepens the slope slightly. Asakusa stays flat through FY2026, starts climbing 5 points a year from FY2027 and still has not reached the cap in FY2029. Naha steps up in FY2027, reaches the cap in FY2028 and flattens again. Even with the same “rate of increase in assessed value,” a different starting burden level means a different year when the tax starts rising and a different year when it stops.
| Area | FY2026 | FY2027 | FY2028 | FY2029 | Increase (FY2026→FY2029) | Growth | Cap at 60% of assessed value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tokyo Shinjuku | ¥127,747 | ¥140,499 | ¥153,022 | ¥153,022 | ¥25,275 | +19.8% | Reached by FY2029 |
| Tokyo Ginza | ¥365,146 | ¥384,453 | ¥384,453 | ¥384,453 | ¥19,308 | +5.3% | Reached by FY2029 |
| Tokyo Asakusa | ¥42,520 | ¥47,293 | ¥52,065 | ¥56,837 | ¥14,317 | +33.7% | Not reached (about 0.1 years of steps left) |
| Tokyo Shibuya | ¥200,120 | ¥222,111 | ¥244,102 | ¥263,894 | ¥63,774 | +31.9% | Reached by FY2029 |
| Osaka Kita | ¥72,960 | ¥81,665 | ¥90,370 | ¥99,075 | ¥26,115 | +35.8% | Not reached (about 0.6 years of steps left) |
| Osaka Minami | ¥71,357 | ¥79,279 | ¥87,201 | ¥95,066 | ¥23,709 | +33.2% | Reached by FY2029 |
| Kyoto Shijo-Kawaramachi | ¥80,978 | ¥89,053 | ¥96,899 | ¥96,899 | ¥15,921 | +19.7% | Reached by FY2029 |
| Kyoto Station | ¥60,052 | ¥66,037 | ¥71,815 | ¥71,815 | ¥11,763 | +19.6% | Reached by FY2029 |
| Sapporo Susukino | ¥33,140 | ¥37,339 | ¥41,539 | ¥45,739 | ¥12,599 | +38.0% | Not reached (about 1.1 years of steps left) |
| Fukuoka Hakata | ¥74,220 | ¥83,177 | ¥92,134 | ¥101,091 | ¥26,870 | +36.2% | Not reached (about 0.7 years of steps left) |
| Fukuoka Tenjin | ¥81,642 | ¥91,218 | ¥100,793 | ¥110,368 | ¥28,726 | +35.2% | Not reached (about 0.5 years of steps left) |
| Naha Kokusai-dori | ¥37,883 | ¥41,368 | ¥41,818 | ¥41,818 | ¥3,934 | +10.4% | Reached by FY2029 |
| Hakuba | ¥2,364 | ¥2,826 | ¥3,287 | ¥3,749 | ¥1,385 | +58.6% | Not reached (about 3.9 years of steps left) |
| Kutchan | ¥11,912 | ¥13,294 | ¥14,676 | ¥16,058 | ¥4,146 | +34.8% | Not reached (about 0.4 years of steps left) |
| Takayama | ¥26,832 | ¥29,642 | ¥32,452 | ¥33,720 | ¥6,888 | +25.7% | Reached by FY2029 |
| Karuizawa | ¥16,973 | ¥18,793 | ¥20,613 | ¥21,840 | ¥4,867 | +28.7% | Reached by FY2029 |
| Hakone-Yumoto | ¥21,625 | ¥23,915 | ¥26,206 | ¥27,489 | ¥5,864 | +27.1% | Reached by FY2029 |
The increase ranges from ¥1,400 in Hakuba to ¥63,800 in Shibuya (the smallest among cities is Naha at ¥3,900). In percentage terms Hakuba Village leads at +59%, but per room that is only ¥1,400. With a FAR of 200%, the site area per room is a large 19.2 sqm, but the published price is just ¥40,300/sqm. Shibuya, by contrast, rose +48.1% over three years, a third of Hakuba’s rate, but a published price of ¥4,800,000/sqm combined with a 500% FAR makes it the largest in yen. Regional resorts lead on rates; central Tokyo leads on amounts.
Another takeaway: seven areas have not finished climbing the staircase by FY2029. In Tokyo Asakusa, Osaka Kita, Sapporo Susukino, Fukuoka Hakata, Fukuoka Tenjin, Hakuba and Kutchan, the next revaluation in FY2030 arrives before they reach the cap of 60% of assessed value. At that point the rises from January 2026 to January 2029 land on assessed values all at once, so burden levels fall further and the staircase continues without a break. In the two Fukuoka areas, the staircase that began in FY2024 is still not over in FY2029; if assessed values rise again in the FY2030 revaluation, tax will have risen nine years in a row. Rather than treating the increase on the FY2027 tax bill as final, it is sensible to put it into business plans as a staircase that runs to FY2029 and on beyond FY2030.
When Do Rises After the Valuation Date Take Effect? — Estimating the Carry-Over
So how much tax do rises after the January 2026 valuation date add, and when? We add the half-year gains for January–July 2026 from MLIT’s common-site data (Tokyo area +4.5%, Osaka area +3.8%, four regional cities +2.3%, elsewhere +1.4%) to each area’s 2026 published price and recalculate assessed values. The resulting per-room difference once the taxable base reaches its cap (60% of assessed value) is as follows.
| Area | Rise in January–July 2026 (regional common sites) | Difference per room at the cap (annual) | Reflected in FY2027–FY2029 tax | First base year reflecting it |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tokyo Shinjuku | 4.5% | ¥6,886 | None (cap already reached in FY2029; difference calculated at that year’s cap level) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Tokyo Ginza | 4.5% | ¥17,300 | None (cap already reached in FY2029; difference calculated at that year’s cap level) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Tokyo Asakusa | 4.5% | ¥2,577 | None (cap still not reached in FY2029) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Tokyo Shibuya | 4.5% | ¥11,875 | None (cap already reached in FY2029; difference calculated at that year’s cap level) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Osaka Kita | 3.8% | ¥3,969 | None (cap still not reached in FY2029) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Osaka Minami | 3.8% | ¥3,613 | None (cap already reached in FY2029; difference calculated at that year’s cap level) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Kyoto Shijo-Kawaramachi | 3.8% | ¥3,682 | None (cap already reached in FY2029; difference calculated at that year’s cap level) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Kyoto Station | 3.8% | ¥2,729 | None (cap already reached in FY2029; difference calculated at that year’s cap level) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Sapporo Susukino | 2.3% | ¥1,159 | None (cap still not reached in FY2029) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Fukuoka Hakata | 2.3% | ¥2,472 | None (cap still not reached in FY2029) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Fukuoka Tenjin | 2.3% | ¥2,643 | None (cap still not reached in FY2029) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Naha Kokusai-dori | 1.4% | ¥585 | None (cap already reached in FY2029; difference calculated at that year’s cap level) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Hakuba | 1.4% | ¥78 | None (cap still not reached in FY2029) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Kutchan | 1.4% | ¥232 | None (cap still not reached in FY2029) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Takayama | 1.4% | ¥472 | None (cap already reached in FY2029; difference calculated at that year’s cap level) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Karuizawa | 1.4% | ¥306 | None (cap already reached in FY2029; difference calculated at that year’s cap level) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
| Hakone-Yumoto | 1.4% | ¥385 | None (cap already reached in FY2029; difference calculated at that year’s cap level) | FY2030 (Jan 1, 2029 valuation date) |
Read the table with care. Converted to tax, the half-year rise looks small at ¥78–¥17,300 per room a year, but that is the flip side of “not a single yen is reflected in FY2027–FY2029.” Rises during 2026 enter assessed values only at the FY2030 revaluation, and in areas that have not finished climbing the FY2027 staircase by then, the new denominator arrives while the 5-point climb is still under way. The total lag before a land price rise is fully reflected in a hotel’s holding tax is the valuation lag (up to just over four years) plus the burden adjustment lag (one to seven years): two to three years in central areas that were in the hold zone, and around seven years at sites like Hakuba Village where prices more than doubled in three years.
Impact on NOI and Yield — The Increase Is 0.08–2.02% of Room NOI
Next we translate the absolute tax amounts into investment-decision units. Room revenue is annualized as each area’s estimated settled ADR (12-month average, October 2025–September 2026) times a full-year occupancy of 82% (an assumption for the estimate); total revenue is set at 1.15 times room revenue, with a GOP margin of 40% and 4% of total revenue deducted for the FF&E reserve, insurance and other items to arrive at NOI. This is the same build as our earlier holding-tax article. We then divide the FY2026→FY2029 increase in land holding tax by NOI, and also by ¥24.25 million, the median acquisition price per room of domestic properties held by seven listed hotel REITs (N=298 properties, ownership master as of October 12, 2026), to get the yield impact.
| Area | Est. settled ADR (12-month avg.) | Properties covered | NOI per room (annual) | Holding tax increase (annual) | Share of NOI | Yield impact | Value equivalent (expected yield) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tokyo Shinjuku | ¥16,053 | 84〜101 | ¥1,989,130 | ¥25,275 | 1.27% | 0.104pt | ¥601,776(4.2%) |
| Tokyo Ginza | ¥19,047 | 148〜152 | ¥2,360,118 | ¥19,308 | 0.82% | 0.080pt | ¥459,708(4.2%) |
| Tokyo Asakusa | ¥14,450 | 161〜177 | ¥1,790,502 | ¥14,317 | 0.80% | 0.059pt | ¥340,885(4.2%) |
| Tokyo Shibuya | ¥25,449 | 29〜34 | ¥3,153,391 | ¥63,774 | 2.02% | 0.263pt | ¥1,518,440(4.2%) |
| Osaka Kita | ¥11,032 | 71〜74 | ¥1,366,977 | ¥26,115 | 1.91% | 0.108pt | ¥580,323(4.5%) |
| Osaka Minami | ¥11,869 | 184〜194 | ¥1,470,690 | ¥23,709 | 1.61% | 0.098pt | ¥526,873(4.5%) |
| Kyoto Shijo-Kawaramachi | ¥17,016 | 103〜112 | ¥2,108,456 | ¥15,921 | 0.76% | 0.066pt | ¥346,102(4.6%) |
| Kyoto Station | ¥15,652 | 157〜170 | ¥1,939,442 | ¥11,763 | 0.61% | 0.048pt | ¥255,717(4.6%) |
| Sapporo Susukino | ¥14,514 | 130〜140 | ¥1,798,433 | ¥12,599 | 0.70% | 0.052pt | ¥251,982(5.0%) |
| Fukuoka Hakata | ¥14,451 | 142〜151 | ¥1,790,626 | ¥26,870 | 1.50% | 0.111pt | ¥559,802(4.8%) |
| Fukuoka Tenjin | ¥16,059 | 79〜84 | ¥1,989,874 | ¥28,726 | 1.44% | 0.118pt | ¥598,458(4.8%) |
| Naha Kokusai-dori | ¥10,262 | 136〜144 | ¥1,271,566 | ¥3,934 | 0.31% | 0.016pt | ¥78,687(5.0%) |
| Hakuba | ¥14,359 | 32〜50 | ¥1,779,227 | ¥1,385 | 0.08% | 0.006pt | Not surveyed |
| Kutchan | ¥27,551 | 20〜24 | ¥3,413,850 | ¥4,146 | 0.12% | 0.017pt | Not surveyed |
| Takayama | ¥17,120 | 119〜142 | ¥2,121,343 | ¥6,888 | 0.32% | 0.028pt | Not surveyed |
| Karuizawa | ¥23,651 | 49〜53 | ¥2,930,600 | ¥4,867 | 0.17% | 0.020pt | Not surveyed |
| Hakone-Yumoto | ¥26,481 | 170〜187 | ¥3,281,266 | ¥5,864 | 0.18% | 0.024pt | Not surveyed |
The share of NOI ranges from 0.08% in Hakuba to 2.02% in Shibuya (the smallest among cities is Naha at 0.31%), and the yield impact stays within 0.006–0.263 pt. Compared with the 0.7 pt yield drag of holding taxes as a whole shown in our earlier article, the part moved by this revaluation is just under 40% of that (0.263 pt) even in Shibuya, the largest, and 0.12 pt or less in the other 16 areas. Converting to value, however, changes the picture. Capitalized at the expected yield for limited-service hotels in the Japan Real Estate Institute’s investor survey, a ¥63,800 annual increase in Shibuya equals ¥1,518,400 of value per room, or about ¥150 million for 100 rooms. Even in Naha Kokusai-dori it is ¥78,700 per room. For an operator who keeps holding, it is a matter of tens of thousands of yen a year; for parties buying or selling from 2027 on, it is an amount built into the taxes and public charges line of an appraisal, and so a point in price negotiations.
This impact can also be offset by revenue growth. For example, Asakusa’s ¥14,300 increase equals 0.33% of annual room revenue per room against an estimated settled ADR of ¥14,500, or about ¥48 of ADR. As our earlier articles showed, ADR’s three-year change has not kept pace with land prices’ three-year change in many locations, but it is worth noting as well that a rate improvement of tens to hundreds of yen per night is enough to absorb the holding-tax staircase.
Sensitivity — How Far Does the Share of NOI Move With Occupancy and GOP Margin?
The share of NOI in the previous table is a base case assuming 82% full-year occupancy and a 40% GOP margin. Because the holding tax increase does not depend on revenue assumptions, the share of NOI moves only with NOI in the denominator. With a downside case (72% full-year occupancy, 35% GOP margin) and an upside case (88%, 45%), six representative areas fall within the ranges below: Shibuya and Kita with the largest shares of NOI, Fukuoka Hakata, Asakusa starting to climb from the hold zone, Naha as the smallest among cities, and Hakuba as the smallest overall. The FF&E reserve, insurance and other items (4% of total revenue) are fixed in all three cases.
| Area | Holding tax increase (annual, per room) | Downside (72% full-year occupancy, 35% GOP margin) | Base (82%, 40%) | Upside (88%, 45%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tokyo Shibuya | ¥63,774 | 2.67% | 2.02% | 1.65% |
| Osaka Kita | ¥26,115 | 2.53% | 1.91% | 1.56% |
| Fukuoka Hakata | ¥26,870 | 1.98% | 1.50% | 1.23% |
| Tokyo Asakusa | ¥14,317 | 1.06% | 0.80% | 0.65% |
| Naha Kokusai-dori | ¥3,934 | 0.41% | 0.31% | 0.25% |
| Hakuba | ¥1,385 | 0.10% | 0.08% | 0.06% |
NOI = 12-month average estimated settled ADR (October 2025–September 2026) × full-year occupancy × 365 days × 1.15 × (GOP margin − 4%). The base case matches the previous table. Source: MetroEngines Research & Consulting estimates
| Occupancy \ GOP margin | GOP 30% | GOP 35% | GOP 40% | GOP 45% | GOP 50% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Full-year occupancy 70% | 3.28% | 2.75% | 2.37% | 2.08% | 1.85% |
| Full-year occupancy 76% | 3.02% | 2.53% | 2.18% | 1.92% | 1.71% |
| Full-year occupancy 82% | 2.80% | 2.35% | 2.02% | 1.78% | 1.58% |
| Full-year occupancy 88% | 2.61% | 2.19% | 1.88% | 1.65% | 1.47% |
Bold = this article’s base case. Source: MetroEngines Research & Consulting estimates
Even in the downside case no area reaches 3% of NOI; the largest are Shibuya at 2.67% and Kita at 2.53%. In Shibuya’s two-way table, only two cells exceed 3%, where a 30% GOP margin coincides with full-year occupancy of 76% or less. A 5-point drop in GOP margin (2.35%) has almost the same effect as a 12-point drop in occupancy (2.37%), so resilience to the holding-tax staircase depends more on managing GOP margin than occupancy.
What to Build Into Plans Now — Acquisitions, Rent Reviews and Business Plans
Here we turn the above into practical steps for FY2027 budgets and medium-term plans. This is not bad news to brace against; it is one of the few costs whose “when and how much” can be read in advance, so the smart move is to put it in the plan early.
Acquisition Settle three steps in deals from 2027 on
Pro-rata settlement of fixed asset and city planning taxes uses the tax for the year of the transaction, but tax rises 5 points a year in FY2027–FY2029, and in seven areas it keeps rising after FY2030. For NOI projections at acquisition, use the FY2029 level (this article’s table) and the next revaluation in FY2030 rather than the FY2027 tax bill. For sites in Fukuoka, Sapporo, Hakuba and Kutchan, where burden levels have already fallen to around 60%, assume they are already partway up the staircase. For the option of holding land on a ground lease instead of buying, “Lease or Buy Hotel Land?” estimates per-room ground rent and break-even ADR from published land prices in the same 17 markets and shows a comparison with holding tax built into the rent side.
Rent Align tax-and-charges clauses with the base year
For fixed-rent leases, check whether there is a clause making increases in taxes and public charges grounds for a rent review, and from which year it applies. There is room to revise the clause wording during FY2026 so that review talks coincide with the year the FY2027 revaluation starts moving the tax. For variable-rent (GOP-linked) leases, holding tax stays with the owner as a cost, so the issue is designing the GOP-linked rate on the premise that the owner bears it.
Planning Build it in across four fiscal years
Set holding tax in four stages: FY2027 (first year of the revaluation), FY2028–FY2029 (5-point steps), and FY2030 (the next revaluation, which picks up the 2026–2028 rises). If the FY2027 tax reform outline at the end of 2026 extends the burden adjustment measure, the current rule applies; if it changes, the slope of this article’s staircase changes, so schedule one review after the outline is published.
Finally, one forward-looking point on FY2030. Of the 17 areas in this article, six saw the 2026 survey’s YoY change exceed the 2026 publication’s, meaning growth kept accelerating after the valuation date. In these areas gains will accumulate toward the January 1, 2029 valuation date. Where they overlap with the seven areas in which the next revaluation arrives before the FY2027 staircase is finished, the safe approach is to build medium-term plans assuming unbroken increases from FY2027 through FY2032. In Sapporo and Fukuoka, where growth has turned to slowing, the 5-point rises that have run since FY2024 may ease with the FY2030 revaluation; there, the “end of the staircase” may come into view.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q. If assessed values rise in the FY2027 revaluation, does tax rise at the same rate?
A. No. Commercial land is subject to the burden adjustment measure, and once the burden level falls below 60%, the taxable base is limited to the prior year’s amount plus “5% of assessed value.” In our estimate, even in Hakuba Village, where assessed value rose +134% in three years, FY2029 tax is +59% versus FY2026.
Q. Will the rise in benchmark land prices published in September 2026 be reflected in FY2027 fixed asset tax?
A. No. The FY2027 valuation is based on prices as of January 1, 2026, and in the hold years (FY2028 and FY2029) prices can be revised only when land prices fall. Rises after January 2026 are expected to enter assessed values in FY2030, the next base year.
Q. Will the burden adjustment measure continue beyond FY2027?
A. The current measure expires on March 31, 2027 (Reiwa 9), and MLIT and METI have requested a three-year extension (to March 31, 2030) in their FY2027 local tax reform requests. A decision is expected in the tax reform outline at the end of 2026; this article assumes the current rule continues.
Related Articles
- Japan 2027 Property Tax Revaluation: +30% Value, Only +11% Hotel Tax
- 2026 Land Prices: Hotel Sites +4.3% in 6 Months, Break-even ADR +¥244
- Hotel Depreciable Asset Tax: ¥21k–¥66k per Room a Year, 3 Models
- 31m Height Limit = 10 Hotel Floors: Kyoto Site Need 672→448 sqm
- Lease or Buy Hotel Land? 13 of 17 Japan Markets Clear a 30-Yr Lease
- Hotel Land Carry Cost 5.9%/yr: ¥2.42M per Room Before Opening
- Hotel Business Office Tax: ¥5,900–22,500/Room in Only 77 Cities
References and Sources
■ Data sources
Land Price Publication and Land Price Survey data from MLIT’s “Real Estate Information Library” (2020–2026; median of 346 identical commercial standard and benchmark sites around the 17 areas with prices available in every year), MIC notices on revaluation and downward correction, and MLIT and METI FY2027 local tax reform requests. ADR is MetroEngines Research & Consulting’s estimated settled ADR (median at municipality level, October 2025–September 2026; 20–194 properties covered depending on area and month); acquisition price per room is from the listed hotel REIT ownership master (N=298 properties, as of October 12, 2026).
■ Estimation assumptions
100 rooms, 3,850 sqm of floor area (38.5 sqm per room); site area = floor area ÷ median designated FAR; assessed value = published price × 70%. The FY2021 burden level is set at 70%, and the current burden adjustment rule (70% or more: 70% of assessed value; 60% to under 70%: held; under 60%: prior-year taxable base + 5% of assessed value, capped at 60% and floored at 20%) is assumed to continue from FY2027. Tax rate: 1.4% fixed asset tax + 0.3% city planning tax = 1.7%. NOI = estimated settled ADR × 82% full-year occupancy × 365 days × 1.15 × (40% GOP margin − 4% FF&E etc.); sensitivity covers 72–88% occupancy and 30–50% GOP margin. Value conversion uses the Japan Real Estate Institute’s expected yields for limited-service hotels (4.2–5.0%).
■ Limitations
Land only; buildings and depreciable assets are excluded. Actual taxable bases differ with parcel-by-parcel valuation, lot adjustments and ordinance-based reductions; this article’s values are representative values based on medians of the same sites. Downward corrections in FY2022 and FY2023 are approximated with the following year’s published decline rates. The FY2027 price survey date (January 1, 2026) is an expectation based on precedent, and whether the burden adjustment measure is extended will be decided in the tax reform outline at the end of 2026. Post-valuation-date rises apply regional common-site values and are not area-specific measurements. ADR is an estimate and differs from actual settled rates.
■ Rules (MIC, tax reform requests)
- MIC “Points to Note on the FY2024 Revaluation of Fixed Assets” (Sozeihyo No. 15, May 23, 2022) (Japanese) — price survey date; 70% of published land prices, etc.
- MIC “Implementation of the Special Provision on Land Prices for FY2022 (so-called ‘Downward Correction’)” (Sozeihyo No. 44, September 22, 2021) (Japanese)
- MLIT “FY2027 Local Tax Reform (Tax Relief Measures) Requests — Extension of the Land Burden Adjustment Measure and Ordinance-Based Reduction System” (Japanese)
- METI “FY2027 Local Tax Reform (Tax Relief Measures) Requests — Extension of the Land Burden Adjustment Measure and Ordinance-Based Reduction System” (Japanese)
- Tokyo Metropolitan Government Bureau of Taxation “Burden Adjustment Measure for Commercial Land” (Japanese)
■ Land prices (MLIT)
- MLIT “2026 Land Price Publication” (released March 17, 2026) / Summary (changes by region and ranking of top changes) (Japanese)
- MLIT “2026 Prefectural Land Price Survey” (released September 15, 2026) / Summary (half-year land price changes at sites common to the Land Price Publication) (Japanese)
- MLIT “Real Estate Information Library” Land Price Publication and Land Price Survey data (2020–2026, commercial standard and benchmark sites around the 17 areas)
■ Market data and industry reports
- MetroEngines Research & Consulting — estimated settled ADR (17 municipalities, October 2025–September 2026), properties and rooms within the areas (as tracked by us), listed hotel REIT ownership master (N=298 properties, as of October 12, 2026)
- Japan Real Estate Institute “53rd Japanese Real Estate Investor Survey” (as of October 2025) — expected yields for limited-service hotels
