On 7 August 2026, Japanese media reported a run of misconduct cases inside the National Tax Agency (NTA). A 25-year-old official who took about ¥150 million from a wealthy taxpayer he was auditing and spent it on boat racing; an inspector who sent details of 259 taxpayers over LINE to a scam caller; an employee disciplined for undeclared side work. A senior official was quoted as saying, "Unprecedented, malicious misconduct is happening one after another." But what taxpayers should take from this is less outrage than practice: what can I actually do to protect myself? Here are the facts, the numbers in context, three concrete safeguards, and the official complaints channel most people have never heard of.
What happened: three reported cases
¥150 million from an audit subject, spent on boat racing
A 25-year-old male official received about ¥150 million from a wealthy woman he was auditing, telling her he was sending money to his family. He is also suspected of defrauding her of about ¥850,000 by claiming an error in an amended return. Dismissed for cause; referred to prosecutors on suspicion of fraud and violation of the Income Tax Act.
Undeclared side work
A woman in her twenties earned about ¥2.3 million from side work she had not declared and from money received via social media. Pay cut, then resignation. National public servants face restrictions on outside employment.
259 taxpayer records leaked
A male inspector in his thirties, taken in by a scam caller impersonating the prefectural police, sent corporate and individual names and filing amounts for 259 records over LINE. Suspended, then resigned. Taxpayers whose details leaked went on to receive scam calls.
The first two are individual wrongdoing. The third made 259 uninvolved taxpayers into victims, and it started with an official being scammed himself. In other words, your filing details can leak with no fault of your own. The rest of this article deals with that.
The numbers: 37 disciplinary actions a year at the NTA
According to the National Personnel Authority, 249 regular national public servants were disciplined during 2025 (36 fewer than the year before). By ministry: Ministry of Justice 60, National Tax Agency 37, Japan Coast Guard 31, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism 26, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare 18.
The NTA ranks second, but larger organisations naturally produce more cases. The tax administration's authorised headcount is about 56,000, so 37 is roughly 0.07%. It is also six fewer than the previous year.
0.07% shows that the overwhelming majority of officials do their job properly — but it is no guarantee that the one assigned to you is not the exception. Neither ignoring the risk because it is small nor condemning the whole tax administration over one news story gets you anywhere. What matters is knowing what to do if it happens.
Safeguard 1: There is no situation in which you hand cash to an auditor
How payment actually works
Tax is paid to the national treasury by payment slip, direct debit, direct payment, credit card, smartphone app or at a convenience store — through a financial institution, the tax office counter or e-Tax. A receipt or payment record always remains.
What never happens
An auditor taking cash directly, naming a personal bank account, or offering to "cover it for now". These are impossible under the system. If you are asked, do not comply — regardless of whether the person is a genuine official.
The person handing over money also carries risk. Giving money or goods in connection with a public servant's duties can constitute bribery under Article 198 of the Penal Code (up to three years' imprisonment or a fine of up to ¥2.5 million), and it will only count against you in the audit.
Officials conducting a tax audit are required to carry and present identification when exercising their questioning and inspection powers (Article 74-13 of the Act on General Rules for National Taxes). Asking is entirely proper. Note the office, name and contact number, and if in doubt call that tax office's main number to confirm the person works there.
Safeguard 2: Judge impersonation by the channel, not the story
The Osaka case began with an official himself falling for a scam call. If a professional can be fooled by the content, the reliable test is the channel.
| How you were contacted | Genuine? |
|---|---|
| An SMS containing a URL | Fake. The NTA does not send SMS messages containing URLs |
| SMS, email or LINE about "unpaid tax" or "seizure notice" | Fake. The NTA does not demand payment or notify seizure by these channels |
| A call asking for your bank account or PIN | Fake. So is being told to operate an ATM |
| A call about a refund telling you to go to an ATM | Fake. Receiving a refund never requires ATM operations |
| A letter arrives, or an official visits | Possibly genuine — but always call the office's main number back to confirm |
Supplying a fake callback number is standard practice for scammers. Look up the tax office number yourself on the NTA site. That single step defeats almost every pattern above.
Safeguard 3: The Taxpayer Support Officer — anonymous and free
Few people know that the NTA has staff dedicated to receiving complaints from taxpayers. The Taxpayer Support Officer role was created in July 2001.
- What you can raise: complaints and concerns about the work of tax offices, regional bureaus and the NTA — an auditor's conduct, how a procedure is being run, whether the handling was appropriate
- How: by phone, in person, in writing or by email. Anonymous contact is accepted
- Where: at each regional taxation bureau (the Okinawa Regional Taxation Office) and some tax offices. If yours has none, matters may be escalated to the bureau or the NTA
- Cost: none
The Taxpayer Support Officer handles conduct and procedure. If you disagree with the assessment or determination itself, you need the formal rights-relief route — and that has deadlines.
| What you object to | Where it goes | Deadline |
|---|---|---|
| An auditor's attitude, poor explanation, how the procedure was run | Taxpayer Support Officer (complaint) | None |
| The disposition itself (first stage) | Request for re-investigation to the district director, or request for review to the National Tax Tribunal | Within 3 months from the day after notice of the disposition |
| The re-investigation result (second stage) | Request for review to the National Tax Tribunal | Within 1 month from the day after notice of the decision |
| The tribunal's determination (third stage) | Litigation in court | Within 6 months from the day after notice of the determination |
Tax officials' confidentiality duty is twice as heavy as other public servants'
| Basis | Who it covers | Penalty |
|---|---|---|
| National Public Service Act art. 100(1) (penalty: art. 109(xii)) | All national public servants | Up to 1 year's imprisonment or a fine up to ¥500,000 |
| Act on General Rules for National Taxes art. 127 | Those engaged, or formerly engaged, in tax investigation or collection | Up to 2 years' imprisonment or a fine up to ¥1,000,000 |
Note: the amended Penal Code effective 1 June 2025 merged "imprisonment with work" and "imprisonment without work" into a single custodial sentence, and statutory wording was updated accordingly.
The key phrase is "or formerly engaged": the duty survives resignation. Because the duty exists to protect taxpayers, an auditor conducting a cross-check with your business partners generally may not disclose your own filing details to them. If you learn that this happened, it is a matter for the Taxpayer Support Officer.
The irony: boat racing payouts are taxable for you too
The tax evasion in the Ryugasaki case was unreported boat racing winnings — reportedly some ¥334 million over three years from 2023 to 2025, evading about ¥135 million in income tax.
Payouts from public racing are in principle occasional income. The most common misunderstanding is what counts as a deductible cost: only the price of the winning tickets. Losing tickets are generally not deductible (barring exceptional cases treated as continuous profit-seeking activity). With large annual payouts, the tax can remain even when the money does not.
That an enforcement official was caught under the same rule is a reminder that the rule has no exceptions. If you have unreported income, filing voluntarily before being contacted keeps the additional tax lower.
Frequently asked questions
Q. Can I check whether my filing details have leaked?
A. There is no way for a taxpayer to check proactively; if a leak is confirmed, the authorities notify those affected. If you see concrete signs — an unknown business contacting you with knowledge of your revenue or filing amount — contact both the Taxpayer Support Officer and the police consultation line (#9110).
Q. I am unhappy with an auditor's conduct. Where do I raise it?
A. With the Taxpayer Support Officer, by phone, in person, in writing or by email, anonymously if you prefer, at no cost. If instead you dispute the disposition itself, that is a separate route: a request for re-investigation or a request for review must be filed within three months from the day after notice of the disposition.
Q. How do I tell whether a call claiming to be from the tax office is genuine?
A. Judge by the channel, not the story. The NTA does not send SMS messages containing URLs and does not demand payment or notify seizure by SMS, email or LINE. It does not ask for bank account numbers or PINs by phone, nor direct you to operate an ATM. Confirm by calling back a number you looked up yourself, never the one you were given.
Q. May I give an auditor cash or a gift?
A. There is no situation in which tax is handed to an official. Payment is made to the state by payment slip, direct debit, direct payment, credit card, smartphone app or convenience store, and a record always remains. Giving money or goods in connection with a public servant's duties can amount to bribery under Article 198 of the Penal Code, so the giver also bears risk.
Q. What is the penalty if a tax official leaks information?
A. Under Article 127 of the Act on General Rules for National Taxes, a person engaged or formerly engaged in tax investigation or collection who discloses or misappropriates a secret learned in that work faces up to two years' imprisonment or a fine of up to ¥1,000,000 — twice the penalty for the general confidentiality duty of national public servants, and it applies after leaving the service.
Sources
Case details come from Jiji Press reporting; the statistics, institutions and statutes were confirmed against public sources. Matters still under investigation or before the courts reflect the position as reported and are not established facts.
*This article is for general information and is not intended to condemn any particular individual or organisation. Criminal responsibility in the reported cases is presumed absent until established in court. For individual tax matters, consult a tax office or a licensed tax accountant.