The document outlines the Japanese end-of-life vehicle (ELV) recycling law, tracing its history from the Teshima case in 1990 to the law's enactment and enforcement in the early 2000s. It compares the Japanese system with Germany's, highlighting key differences in responsibilities between producers, dismantlers, and users regarding the handling and disposal of vehicles. Additionally, it addresses issues surrounding illegal practices in reporting ELVs, fee structures, and challenges faced by stakeholders in the recycling process.

1. About the Japanese End-of-life Vehicles Recycling Law
1. The structure of the Law
other file (by the Japanese government)
2. Short history of the Law
year
Around 1990 Teshima Case appeared, in which a lot of automobile shredder residue
(ASR) was dumped illegally, and industrial waste became a social
problem.
1995 The criteria for dumping ASR were strengthened. The holders of ASR
became unable to dump it in a simple and cheap landfill site. ASR has
to be dumped in a controlled and expensive landfill site.
1997 The government announced a guideline for recycling and disposal of
end-of-life vehicles.
Jury 2002 The Law for the Recycling of End-of-Life Vehicles was enacted.
January 2005 The Law for the Recycling of End-of-Life Vehicles took effect.
3. Comparison with German system
Parts,
Vehicle Use ELV Separating materials Recovery or
Disposal
Japan Germany
Common • Producers take back some waste objects free of charge．
characteristic • Producers are responsible to dispose of waste.
• When producers delegate the recycling and disposal to some
recycling operators, they select and monitor the operators.
• The selection and monitoring is getting stricter with the degree of
the responsibility.
Differences • Producers take back objects • Producers take back ELVs
after separating ELVs. before separating them.
• Producers are responsible to • Producers are responsible to
dispose of only the objects. dispose of the whole ELVs.
• Producers aren't responsible • Producers aren't responsible
for the disposal until the for the disposal until the ELVs
objects are collected. are taken back.
• Collection fees of the objects • Delivery fees of the ELVs are
are paid to the separating paid to the holders.
operators. • Producers select and monitor
• Producers select and monitor the separating operators as
the recovery and disposal well as the recovery and
operators. disposal operators.

2. ELVs 3,000,000—4,000,000? (see below) 700,000?
Exported 1,000,000-1,400,000? (see below) 2,300,000?
used vehicles
4. The number of the ELVs
When a vehicle becomes end-of-life, the collection operator of the vehicle has to report
the situation to the JARC. Therefore, the JARC and government can compile the
number of ELVs generated in Japan. But if the collection operator doesn’t report it, the
JARC and government cannot monitor the total number of the ELVs. Some dismantlers
don’t have an incentive to report the result. This is illegal behavior. People say that not
reported end-of-life vehicles are from 500 000 to 1 000 000.
Table 1: The number of the unused vehicles in fiscal 2005
Total 5 000 000
(1)Exported used cars 1 350 000
(2)Increased stock of used cars 100 000
(3)ELVs dismantled inland 3 050 000
(4)Other 500 000
Source: Estimation by the METI (Ministry of the Economy, Trade and Industry)
Total number of the unused vehicles in fiscal 2005 = number of vehicles owned in March
2005 + number of new vehicles – number of vehicles owned in March 2005
Some car dismantlers take the cars as secondhand and dismantle them without
reporting the collection to JARC. This is illegal and the number is not included in the
above “(3)ELVs dismantled inland”.
Some legal dismantlers say that the above “(4) Other” is the number of illegal channel.
Recently, auto auction business is developed and it is getting easier to get secondhand.
Substantially end-of-life vehicles are traded at the auction as secondhand.
5. Exported used cars
Table 2: Top 20 (in 2005) countries (calendar year)
Countries 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
1 Russia 26143 42771 68123 120052 268584 202603
2 New Zealand 86373 125112 144349 135006 132600 60899
3 United Arab Emirates 40749 87957 108236 144090 113818 74852
4 Chile 5984 8461 14410 27400 47487 29899
5 United Kingdom 18143 29761 55484 57006 31962 16668
6 South Africa 8273 14105 22207 37896 31405 17255
7 Philippines 14326 25027 28177 32942 21497 13079
8 Peru 23865 33870 29463 21834 19510 14656

3. 9 Kenya 6593 11358 13408 16929 18317 12386
10 Sri Lanka 8643 20866 26921 18892 17539 15042
11 Malaysia 7312 10840 11023 11586 17531 8348
12 Kazakhstan 35 243 4195 6489 16970 19564
13 Australia 10792 13792 8074 11036 14157 4905
14 Cyprus 12858 18914 15788 20127 12706 6652
15 Pakistan 324 1944 1952 2370 11776 29997
16 Singapore 7982 10810 9976 12500 11495 9472
17 Suriname 4219 7856 9399 10599 11274 5477
18 Bangladesh 10083 13072 9073 7573 10559 6112
19 Jamaica 13463 18214 15312 15917 9493 5968
20 Trinidad and Tobago 5961 11526 11127 10298 8930 5459
Total 371090 603866 712968 835233 940298 638582
* the data in 2001 is from April to December.
** the data in 2006 is from January to July
source: Trade Statistics of Ministry of Finance (MOF)
In MOF Trade Statistics, vehicles with prices less than the 200,000 yen are not
calculated. Therefore, the real number is more than the above.
In addition, the data in Table 1 is that of the fiscal year and different from the data of
Table 2.
6. Other information
The number of illegal dumping and improper storage of scrapped cars
Total Improper storage Illegal dumping
March, 2006 57 080 44 203 12 877
September, 2005 76 954 62 468 14 486
March, 2005 140 436 122 599 17 837
September, 2004 218 359 195 860 22 499
Source: Ministry of Environment
The number of authorized (licensed) operators
March, 2005 September, 2005 March, 2006
Collection operators 85 144 87 513 88 251
Dismantling operators 5 490 6 042 6 279
Shredding operators 123 120 124
Source: Ministry of Environment
Licensed dismantling operators include some car dealers and repairing operators who
don’t dismantle the cars as daily business. However, they sometimes salvage the used
parts. In order to do it, they have to get the license for the dismantling operator. Some

4. people say that the substantial number of dismantling operators is around 2500.
7. A problem of Japanese ELVs Recycling Law
In Japanese law, the government wants the last car user to pay the recycling fee. But it
does not work. The last user can deliver its car to the car dealer or dismantler without
paying the recycling fee.
The reason is in the payment structure of the recycling fee. In the law,
• The first vehicle owner pays the recycling fee to the producer.
• When the owner can find the next owner, the former owner can get the fee from the
next owner. This means the former owner gets a refund of the fee and the next
owner pays the fee instead of the former owner.
• When an owner can not find the next owner, it becomes the last owner of the vehicle
and delivers it to a collection operator. The collection operator does not pay the fee
to the owner.
vehicle
Former Last owner Collection price
owner operator fee
The problem is that the last owner is not necessarily equal to the last user. The
dismantler often becomes the last owner and pays the fee.
(C) Dismantler
Producers (1)
secondhand
(JARC)
(A)
Car Dealer price+fee
secondhand
Recycling fee end-of-life
price+fee Dismantler
User price (2)
end-of-life
end-of-life
price Car Dealer Dismantler
(3)
(B)
price
*The recycling fee is for the CFC, the airbag and the automobile shredder residue
(ASR).
Case Last owner Collection operator
(1) User Car Dealer
(2) Car Dealer Dismantler
(3) Dismantler Dismantler
In the above situation, the car dealer has to decide whether he/she should take the car

5. from the user as end-of-life or secondhand.
• If the dealer takes the car as secondhand, it has to pay recycling fee to the
user.(situation (A))
• If the dealer takes the car as end-of-life, it doesn’t have to pay the recycling fee.
(situation (B))
The user wants the dealer to take the car as secondhand because it can get the recycling
fee from the dealer.
The car dealer doesn’t have enough bargaining power against the car user. Therefore,
the car dealer often takes the car as secondhand and it pays the recycling fee to the user.
Similarly, the dismantler doesn’t have enough bargaining power against the car dealer.
Therefore, it often takes the car as secondhand and it pays the recycling fee to the dealer.
(situation (C))
As a result, the dismantler becomes the last owner of the car in the eye of the law and
pays the recycling fee. The car user doesn’t pay the recycling fee in the system.