[No. 661] Getting to the Core of the LDP Presidential Election! What Policies Will Shape the Future? A Thorough Analysis! (2025/10/01) #TaroYamadaSanChannel [Transcript]
Today's Theme
This is "Taro Yamada's San Channel." Following our previous episode, today we are bringing you a "LDP Presidential Election 2025 Pre-Election Special."
While many mass media outlets focus on political maneuvering, this program digs deep into policy in a serious manner. Specifically, I would like to delve into policies according to each theme, such as "Who, if they become president, will make our lives easier?" and "What will happen to tax cuts?"
Among the candidates in this presidential election, there may be some whose policies are difficult to understand without a detailed explanation of the new systems. Since many katakana policy names are appearing, today I will carefully explain them one by one while comparing the five candidates.
Ultimately, I want to think together with you, the viewers, about who we should actually vote for. Also, if you have any opinions such as "this candidate is excellent in this respect," I would like to use them as a reference for my own vote in the upcoming presidential election this weekend, so please actively write in the chat section.
The presidential election is finally heating up. I also visited the LDP headquarters for the first time in a while yesterday, and I felt that the entire party was energized by the presidential election under the slogan "#ChangeLDP." Handwritten messages from each candidate are posted at the LDP headquarters.
Also, yesterday, I happened to hold a party headquarters tour for a seminar I host for university students and others called "Yamada Juku." At that time, I was able to enter the president's office, and I looked at it with deep emotion, imagining the face of the next president, thinking, "Who will be sitting in this chair in a few days?"
However, personally, I feel a deeper emotion for the relatively small and modest room next to the president's office than for the office itself. I feel that this room is a historical place that will change the LDP, and by extension, Japanese politics.
Here, liaison meetings between the ruling party and the government are held, and every Tuesday, all party executives, including the LDP president who is also the Prime Minister, the Secretary-General, the Policy Research Council Chairman, and the General Council Chairman, gather to make final policy decisions.
I feel more weight in this room, where history has truly been made, than in the president's office. Perhaps I feel this way even more because the incumbent president spends a lot of time at the Prime Minister's Official Residence as Prime Minister.
Main Issues of the Presidential Election and Candidates
The schedule for the presidential election is fast approaching. The voting and counting will take place on Saturday, October 4th, in the hall on the 8th floor of the party headquarters.
The candidates this time are Mr. Kobayashi, Mr. Motegi, Mr. Hayashi, Ms. Takaichi, and Mr. Koizumi. I explained the outline of each candidate's policies in the previous video, so this time I would like to narrow the discussion down to areas that are directly linked to the economy and your daily lives.
The media tends to report on the candidates' ideologies, such as "whether they have strong conservative colors" or "whether they are right or left, conservative or liberal." However, especially for the younger generation, isn't the big theme this time "up or down"—that is, whether they are existing forces, new forces aiming for reform, or trying to protect the current interest structure, rather than such axes of conflict?
As the presidential election has progressed, it has become clear that leadership for reform is not necessarily determined by age. If you look carefully at each candidate's policies, you can see that youth is not the only condition for being a reformer. With that in mind, I would like to compare each candidate from a fair perspective today.
Latest Situation Analysis: Support Trends for Each Candidate
Kodera:
From here, I will explain the situation as of today.
First, in the opinion poll as of September 18th, Mr. Koizumi was overwhelmingly leading among both LDP supporters and general voters, with Ms. Takaichi following him. At this point, there were reports that Mr. Motegi was also fighting a good fight among LDP supporters.
After that, a difference began to appear in the trends of parliamentary votes and party member votes. In the trends of parliamentary votes as of September 29th, Mr. Hayashi rapidly expanded his support and was chasing Mr. Koizumi, who was still in the lead. On the other hand, there were reports that Ms. Takaichi might be struggling.
However, in the situation survey including party member votes as of the same day, the composition remained unchanged, with Mr. Koizumi still leading significantly and Ms. Takaichi and Mr. Hayashi following. However, at this stage, the "undecided" layer was still quite thick, and since many people, including Mr. Yamada, had not yet decided their stance, the future was completely opaque.
And according to the breaking news released today (October 1st) at 4:00 PM, it is reported that Ms. Takaichi is making a phenomenal comeback and is on track to overtake Mr. Koizumi. Ms. Takaichi showed strength in party member and associate votes in the previous presidential election as well, and predictions are emerging that she will solidify that support base again this time and potentially surpass Mr. Koizumi. This report comes as the deadline for party member votes approaches tomorrow, the 3rd, and the trends in the voting have become somewhat visible.
Yamada:
To summarize the current situation, it is safe to say that the president will effectively be chosen from among Ms. Takaichi, Mr. Koizumi, and Mr. Hayashi. Based on media surveys, Ms. Takaichi and Mr. Koizumi are the frontrunners at this moment, but it is entirely possible that Mr. Hayashi could catch up and secure second place.
In this situation, the existence of 70 Diet members who have not yet clarified their stance is extremely important. I am one of these 70 members, and that decision carries significant weight. I believe that the two votes held by Mr. Akamatsu and myself are also extremely significant, with the potential to sway the outcome of the election in this close race.
I would like to ask all of our viewers to watch this program and write your opinions in the chat, including 'who is suitable to be president' and 'why that person.' I will carefully read your opinions and use them as a reference.
Candidate Policy Stances on Household Support Measures
I would like to look at the policies of each candidate. This time, I will focus specifically on the differences in policies regarding household support. By comparing each candidate from the perspective of money—specifically, what kind of policies they are proposing that directly impact your household and daily life—the differences should become easier to understand.
First, let's grasp the overall picture based on the comparison table I created, and then we will look at the specific policies of each candidate in detail.
I would like to touch upon the points where the candidates' opinions do not differ in this presidential election.
Uniform Cash Benefits
There was a policy of '20,000 yen uniform benefits' proposed during the House of Councillors election under the Ishiba administration, but it has completely faded away this time. All presidential candidates are in a negative position regarding uniform cash benefits.Gasoline Tax Cuts
On the other hand, all candidates are in favor of gasoline tax cuts. This may be a sign that the Liberal Democratic Party, as a minority ruling party, is looking toward cooperation with the Democratic Party for the People in future administration management. Gasoline tax cuts are a policy that the Democratic Party for the People has long insisted upon, and an agreement on this point can be considered a move to maintain that relationship.
This is where the differences between the candidates begin to emerge. First, Ms. Takaichi and Mr. Kobayashi have placed 'benefits' and 'tax cuts' at the core of their policies.
Sanae Takaichi: Refundable Tax Credit (similar to a flat-rate tax cut)
Ms. Takaichi advocates for a 'refundable tax credit.' The term 'refundable' is a consideration for those who do not pay much in taxes. For example, if a 50,000 yen tax cut is decided, but you only pay 30,000 yen in income tax, you would normally only receive a 30,000 yen tax cut. However, with a refundable tax credit, the 20,000 yen difference is paid out, designed so that everyone can equally receive the benefit of 50,000 yen.Takayuki Kobayashi: Proportional Tax Cut (temporary measure)
Mr. Kobayashi is proposing a 'proportional tax cut' as a temporary measure. This is an approach that lowers the income tax rate (percentage).
While both are based on tax cuts, there is a difference between Ms. Takaichi's plan to return a fixed amount and Mr. Kobayashi's plan to cut taxes by a percentage based on income.
Mr. Hayashi's policy is a more complex and carefully designed version of Ms. Takaichi's and Mr. Kobayashi's plans.
Yoshimasa Hayashi: Universal Credit
Mr. Hayashi advocates for a system called 'Universal Credit.' This is similar to a refundable tax credit, but it is a more precisely crafted system. I will explain exactly what this is in detail later when I discuss Mr. Hayashi's policies.
Next, Mr. Hayashi, Mr. Motegi, and Mr. Koizumi emphasize 'wage increases' as the most important means of household support.
Yoshimasa Hayashi
He has set a goal of a '1% increase in real wages.' This means aiming for a state where not only nominal wages (face value) increase, but real take-home pay increases in a way that exceeds price inflation.Toshimitsu Motegi and Shinjiro Koizumi
Both advocate for raising average wages. In particular, Mr. Koizumi is characterized by setting a specific figure of a '1 million yen increase in average wages.'
In addition, there are other policies where each candidate is showing their own unique colors.
Shinjiro Koizumi: Measures for the 'Annual Income Barrier'
Mr. Koizumi is advocating for measures against the 'annual income barrier' (such as the 1.03 million yen barrier), an issue the Democratic Party for the People has long raised. Specifically, he proposes adjusting the basic deduction for income tax.Toshimitsu Motegi: Household Support through Decentralization
Mr. Motegi takes a somewhat unique approach. Because the challenges faced by Tokyo and regional areas differ, he argues that we should promote decentralization, increase block grants, and entrust the use of those funds to each region to support household finances.
While specific uses are not explicitly stated, they would likely be allocated to cash or coupon distributions, subsidies for public utility charges, or support payments for small and medium-sized enterprises and child-rearing households, depending on local circumstances.
Candidates Unable to Commit to a 'Consumption Tax Cut'
In this presidential election, while everyone agrees on a gasoline tax cut, it is highly characteristic that not a single candidate is advocating for a 'consumption tax cut'.
I believe the litmus test for whether the LDP can truly change is whether they can commit to this 'consumption tax cut.' Even if it means fighting the Ministry of Finance or risking a temporary loss of support, the question is whether they can win the public over and advocate for a consumption tax reduction.
I have long argued that the most direct means to calm the current inflation (rising prices) is to uniformly lower the consumption tax to 5% and abolish the complex multiple tax rate system and the invoice system.
However, consumption tax cuts are treated as a taboo, and no one is willing to step into that territory. I wanted Ms. Takaichi to go a bit further. Looking at her statements on television programs and elsewhere, she says she 'has not given up,' but compared to the previous presidential election, one cannot deny the impression that this topic has been sealed off.
Of course, taxes should be high or low depending on the situation. I believe it is important to be able to change them flexibly in accordance with the economic conditions of the time.
Kodera:
Regarding the consumption tax issue, I feel that if even one person had mentioned it this time, the mere fact that such a voice was raised from within the LDP would have changed the party's image. Compared to the previous presidential election, there are few people showing an aggressive stance, which is a bit frustrating as both a party member and a secretary.
Yamada:
At times, isn't it necessary to have the resolve to fight and go down in flames while strongly advocating for one's own claims?
To return to the topic, the household support measures of each candidate can be organized as follows.
Benefit/Tax Cut Type (Fixed Amount/Fixed Rate): Ms. Takaichi, Mr. Kobayashi
Balanced Type: Mr. Hayashi
Wage Increase Focused Type: Mr. Hayashi, Mr. Motegi, Mr. Koizumi
Annual Income Barrier Measures: Mr. Koizumi
Decentralization Type: Mr. Motegi
Based on these policy differences, which candidate do you support?
Policy Review by Candidate: Takayuki Kobayashi
Now, let's take a closer look at the specific policy details of each candidate and what appear to be their 'key selling points.' First, let's start with Takayuki Kobayashi.
The pillar of Mr. Kobayashi's economic policy is a 'fixed-rate tax cut.' This is a method of determining tax cuts by a rate, such as '10%' of income tax.
This method has the characteristic that the higher a person's income, the greater the tax reduction amount. For example, a person with an annual income of 50 million yen would receive a tax reduction of 5 million yen, while a person with an annual income of 5 million yen would receive 500,000 yen. Since this is expected to draw criticism as being 'favoring the wealthy,' Mr. Kobayashi intends to set a 'cap' on the tax reduction amount.
Furthermore, this proportional tax reduction is not intended to be permanent, but is positioned strictly as a 'temporary' measure. While he states that a fundamental review of income tax will be conducted in the future, the specific details of that have not yet been mentioned.
The message that 'those who work hard should receive the most benefits' is very clear and easy to understand. However, it is undeniable that concerns about favoring high-income earners remain.
Another challenge is the time it takes for the effects to appear. Because it targets income tax, the tax reduction would be refunded after filing a tax return, so it may lack immediate impact.
Kodera:
At the root of Mr. Kobayashi's argument is a strong desire to 'increase the take-home pay of the middle class and reduce their burden' and 'realize a society where hard work is rewarded.' I strongly agree with his approach of presenting this policy as a message that we should 'do what we can as quickly as possible'.
Yamada:
I borrowed this from Mr. Kobayashi's video, where he himself compares each tax reduction measure in an easy-to-understand way.
Mr. Kobayashi argues that while proportional tax reduction, fixed-amount tax reduction, consumption tax reduction, and tax credits with benefits each have different pros and cons, a 'proportional tax reduction with a cap' is the most superior.
The biggest reason for this is the 'growth incentive.' He argues that it is most effective for people who are trying hard to increase their income, especially the middle class. He evaluates other methods as follows:
Fixed-amount tax reduction: Tends to end up as a one-time 'one-shot' measure.
Consumption tax reduction: Involves a heavy practical burden at the retail level, such as changing price tags.
Tax credits with benefits: Takes a considerable amount of time to design and implement the system.
The reason why the implementation of 'tax credits with benefits' is particularly difficult is that it is hard for tax authorities to accurately grasp the income of people who have low income and pay little or no tax. While taxpayer information can be tracked, there is the issue of how to collect information on non-taxpayers, which is said to make the system design extremely complex.
Based on these comparisons, Mr. Kobayashi concludes that the 'proportional tax reduction with a cap' that he advocates is the most optimal.
In addition to household support measures, another unique policy advocated by Mr. Kobayashi is the enactment of a 'Foreign Interference Prevention Act (tentative name).'
This aims to prevent information interference and influence operations by foreign powers in elections and government. The background to this includes concerns about international threats, such as the suspected large-scale operations by Russia in the 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections and hacking cases in France. Specifically, it seems to assume interference from countries like Russia and China.
Regarding this bill, voices have been raised on the internet asking if it would 'lead to SNS regulation and be a challenge to freedom of expression.' However, Mr. Kobayashi's side has clarified their stance of limiting the scope, stating that 'the purpose is strictly to deal with foreign powers, and it has nothing to do with domestic speech.'
In my personal opinion, even if the scope is limited, it is likely inevitable that online discourse, including SNS, will be subject to some degree of regulation. I think this Foreign Interference Prevention Act is one of Mr. Kobayashi's most distinctive policies.
Policy Review by Candidate: Toshimitsu Motegi
Next, I would like to look at Toshimitsu Motegi. Mr. Motegi came to my office yesterday, and that was the first time we exchanged business cards. I talked about his intelligence and such last time, so this time I will delve deeper, including his specific economic policies.
One of Mr. Motegi's policies is the creation of a 'Special Local Grant for Living Support.' This is based on the idea that instead of the national government implementing uniform support measures, discretion should be given to the municipal level, which is on the front lines, to respond to different issues in each region. The aim is likely to allow each region to proactively implement measures that suit their respective circumstances by distributing grants that can be used relatively freely.
Another unique policy is "Hello Work Reform." Currently, despite the Japanese economy facing labor shortages and a high number of job openings, there is a "skills gap" and a "mismatch" in employment where the unemployment rate in some areas does not improve. Mr. Motegi believes that the role of Hello Work should be to professionally resolve this issue.
Regarding this proposal, there is debate on the internet, such as "How is it different from private services like Indeed?" and "Is it optimal for a public institution to handle this?" However, this proposal, from the perspective of how to improve the actual working environment, can be said to be a very unique policy characteristic of Mr. Motegi.
Mr. Motegi also has a very strong passion for robot policy. He has experience promoting the "Robot New Strategy 2015" during his time as Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry, and seems to pride himself on being the "originator of robot policy."
This point is very close to my own way of thinking. I have also long argued that the only answer to solving labor shortages in all fields—such as factories, home support, agriculture, customer service, medical care, nursing care, transportation, and picking—is robot technology, including humanoids. This is a part of Mr. Motegi's thinking that I can greatly empathize with.
Mr. Motegi is trying to convey his policies very enthusiastically and in detail on his own YouTube channel, "Motegi Channel." The strength of his motivation is a point worth noting.
All of the presidential candidates this time have their own programs, but many of them focus on content that leads to daily image improvement, such as meals or visits to various locations. There are few candidates who send out such detailed messages about policy. As I am also in a position to speak mainly about policy, I have a very favorable impression of Mr. Motegi's stance.
Kodera:
Like Mr. Yamada, Mr. Motegi also distributes many programs where he continues to talk about policy alone for 20 or 30 minutes. When you watch the videos, it really conveys that he is a "policy expert."
I have heard that Hello Work reform is a policy that Mr. Motegi has been concerned about and has been developing since he first became a lawmaker.
Despite the fact that the labor shortage is so serious, there is a current situation where the active job opening ratio calculated by Hello Work has recently been declining. Mr. Motegi points out that there may be a mismatch here between people looking for jobs and companies looking for talent.
He aims for fundamental reform by making maximum use of the potential of Hello Work, which has about 500 locations nationwide and 30,000 staff members.
Specifically, the idea is to break away from the traditional "public employment security office" function of simply introducing jobs, and to change it into an agency that proactively proposes career plans for skill improvement and salary increases from the Hello Work side, like private job change services (for example, BizReach). The goal is to provide support so that each individual can steadily advance their career.
Yamada:
Regarding that point, I have some questions. Indeed and BizReach focus on active "job changes" aimed at skill improvement and career advancement, but Hello Work has a strong aspect as a place for passive job-seeking activities after unemployment, in a sense. Isn't there a big difference in the roles of the two?
Whether this reform will truly lead to an improvement in the active job opening ratio is one question. Also, "reskilling" (re-learning) is essential for reform, but for example, it would be very difficult for someone who doesn't even know how to turn on a computer to suddenly challenge themselves in the IT field.
Of course, improving the working environment is an extremely important theme, and I believe Mr. Motegi's proposal is one possibility that should be paid attention to.
Policy Review by Candidate: Yoshimasa Hayashi
Next is Yoshimasa Hayashi. If Mr. Motegi is the "intellectual type," I have the impression that Mr. Hayashi is the "versatile artistic type." He is very versatile, playing the Beatles on the piano and belonging to a lawmaker band called "Giins" as a bassist himself.
He is also fluent in English, to the extent that he can handle public debates of the Liberal Democratic Party in English. I remember being impressed when I worked with Mr. Hayashi before and heard him speaking fluent English next to me, thinking that he was truly capable.
What is particularly unique about Mr. Hayashi's economic policy is the introduction of a "Japanese version of Universal Credit." This is a system that aims for detailed household support according to individual circumstances.
Like Mr. Motegi, Mr. Hayashi is also a "policy expert" who talks about policy in detail on his own program, but because he is serious, he might be perceived as a bit plain.
Mechanism and Challenges of Universal Credit
To understand this system, let's first look at the current situation in Japan.
-
Current Situation Analysis (Comparison with OECD Average)
Households with children: In Japan, for those with income below the average (around 5.9 million yen at the median), the burden of taxes and social security contributions is heavier than in other developed countries (OECD average).
This is because there is a lack of generous support for low-income earners, such as the "refundable tax credits" that are common in Europe and elsewhere. In particular, the total amount of support based on the number of children is overwhelmingly lower in Japan than elsewhere.Households without children: On the other hand, for households without children, Japan's burden rate tends to be lower than the developed country average as income increases.
Universal Credit aims to correct these distortions in the burden caused by income and family structure by drawing a smooth curve, and in particular, to provide detailed support to the income bracket below the average. Its design philosophy differs from the linear "refundable tax credit" that provides a fixed amount.
The concept is very detailed, and I feel that it is indeed clever, but designing it is extremely difficult. In particular, it is very difficult to find a way to accurately grasp the income of those with low tax payments and calculate what level of benefit is fair. Even if it can be designed in one's head, how to operate it realistically will be a major challenge.
On the other hand, with fixed-amount benefits of 50,000 or 100,000 yen, or a flat 10% tax cut, it is a fact that some people will fall through the cracks of support because individual circumstances such as the number of children cannot be taken into account. Since even a precise system like France's draws complaints, the question is how far this level of detail can be realized.
Kodera:
When I heard about it, I also felt that it was a very good system that optimizes the burden according to each individual's family structure and income. Mr. Hayashi says he wants to make this a permanent system, and I think it would be wonderful if it could be realized in the long term.
Of course, there will be criticism that it is a "major reform," but Mr. Hayashi, like a practitioner, has already drawn up a concrete implementation plan. The fact that he presents a three-year time span to the public—"a comprehensive review of the current situation in the first year, defining the scope of the system in the second year, and moving to implementation in the third year"—while referring to the model that the UK took 15 years to introduce, leads to a sense of trust that other candidates do not have.
The True Intent of Establishing a "Content Agency" and Freedom of Expression
Yamada:
As something he wants to do if he becomes Prime Minister, Mr. Hayashi strongly advocates for fostering the content industry as Japan's new core industry. His idea is to grow it into an industry that follows or exceeds the automotive industry (currently about 20 trillion yen) and to resolve the public's anxiety about the future.
As concrete policies, he lists support for creators, anti-piracy measures, tax incentives with intellectual property (IP) as collateral, and the establishment of a "Content Agency."
I myself have worked with Mr. Hayashi, who served as the LDP's Intellectual Property Research Commission Chairman, and have been with him in many parliamentary leagues. It was impressive to see him actively expressing his opinions in the leagues just like any other member, despite being in the important position of Chief Cabinet Secretary.
The policies he advocates are almost the same as the proposals I once compiled as Secretary-General, and I feel that our ways of thinking are very close.
Regarding the establishment of this "Content Agency," there have recently been misunderstandings and concerns on the internet that "the government will regulate and control content."
Regarding this, I received an explanation directly from Mr. Hayashi himself by phone the other day. He clearly stated, "The Content Agency is merely an organization to support creators, and we will absolutely not regulate them."
As someone involved in the arts himself, he spoke strongly, saying, "Japanese content can grow precisely because there is freedom of expression, and if we regulate that, it would be self-defeating." I feel that he understands that point well.
Currently, the market size of Japan's content industry has reached 5.8 trillion yen, already exceeding the export value of steel and semiconductors. Mr. Hayashi aims to raise the current growth rate of about 6% to 10% and reach a scale of 20 trillion yen by 2033. There are few industries in Japan today that are continuing to grow to this extent.
Policy Review by Candidate: Sanae Takaichi
Next is Sanae Takaichi. I think Ms. Takaichi is also a very sensitive person, as she was a drummer and rode a motorcycle when she was young.
The pillars of Ms. Takaichi's policy are the introduction of "refundable tax credits" to reduce the burden of social insurance premiums, which are highly regressive, and to provide generous support, especially to low- and middle-income earners.
She also shows a stance of strictly dealing with issues such as national resilience and illegal stays and land acquisition by foreigners. And what is perhaps surprising this time is her policy regarding housekeeping services and babysitters.
Kodera:
Regarding Ms. Takaichi, I truly respect her "consistency." She has updated her blog almost every day since being elected as a lawmaker, and in her YouTube posts, she doesn't just talk about the presidential election; she regularly explains her own thoughts in her own words in an easy-to-understand way, which I find wonderful.
Yamada:
The "tax credit with benefits" policy proposed by Ms. Takaichi is an easy-to-understand mechanism.
-
Example of the mechanism
For example, let's set the deduction amount at 50,000 yen.
For those who pay enough income tax, their tax is reduced by 50,000 yen.
For those whose income tax payment is 20,000 yen, they receive a 20,000 yen tax reduction plus a 30,000 yen benefit for the difference.
For those with no income and no tax liability, the full 50,000 yen is provided as a benefit.
In this way, it is designed so that everyone can receive the benefit of 50,000 yen equally, regardless of their income status.
Kodera:
With this method, there is a possibility that it could be realized relatively quickly.
Yamada:
However, because it is linked to taxes, the actual benefits or refunds would only be issued after the tax amount is finalized. Also, as has been pointed out before, there are institutional challenges, such as the difficulty of accurately grasping the income of tax-exempt households or those with low tax payments.
Kodera:
What Ms. Takaichi is putting forward with particular passion this time is support for women's employment. At the root is the awareness of the problem that there are women who "want to work but cannot" because circumstances like childcare, nursing care, or children's truancy or illness act as shackles. A concrete solution to this is a tax credit for babysitter fees.
-
Concrete policies
Support for using babysitters and housekeepers: When using a babysitter or housekeeper with a "national qualification," the cost will be eligible for a tax credit to reduce the burden on household finances.
Promotion of in-company after-school care: In addition to the increasingly popular in-company daycare centers, we will promote the establishment of "in-company after-school care" as a place for children to stay after school.
Creation of in-company sick child care: We will implement measures to reduce corporate taxes for companies that establish "in-company sick child care," which currently barely exists.
Yamada:
Regarding the "national qualification" for babysitters, I haven't asked her directly about her true intentions, so I don't know, but perhaps the goal is to guarantee the quality of services or increase their added value.
More than that, what impressed me as a realistic childcare policy was the point where she delved into "sick child care." The reality is that even if a child just has a slight cold, the nursery school will call you saying, "Please come and pick them up."
It is a policy that responds to a major challenge faced by parents raising children: "I can't get them looked after exactly when I really need support." Furthermore, the idea of "establishing it within the company" is, I think, quite bold and wonderful.
Of course, it's not as easy as it sounds. Realization will be accompanied by considerable difficulties, such as how much of the burden on the company side can be covered by corporate tax cuts alone, and how to secure personnel and facilities with specialized know-how.
Many sick child care facilities have structural issues where they easily fall into deficit management due to the burden of labor costs and fluctuations in the number of users. However, if she becomes Prime Minister, she will likely move toward implementation as a campaign pledge. If it can be realized, it would be truly amazing.
Honestly, I didn't think Ms. Takaichi would delve this specifically into the issues of babysitters and sick child care.
Policy Review by Candidate: Mr. Shinjiro Koizumi
Finally, Mr. Shinjiro Koizumi. He has a strong image as a sportsman, but in this presidential election, he hasn't put forward many policies like large tax cuts. Instead, what he has placed at the center of his policy is "wage increases."
Mr. Koizumi has pledged to increase the average wage by 1 million yen by 2030. However, there are several questions about this.
First, it is not clear which "average wage" he is referring to. Also, it is set as a goal for 5 years from now (2025), but considering the progress of inflation, it is difficult to judge whether this absolute amount of "1 million yen" is large or small.
Above all, what the people are suffering from is not the "future" but the "current" inflation. Even at our office, we were recently surprised that a Coca-Cola now costs 200 yen, saying, "That's expensive!"
Personally, what I really cannot understand is that a bowl of curry at the LDP headquarters cafeteria costs 902 yen. It has a simple, sweet taste like Bon Curry, the portion is small, and frankly, it is an unremarkable beef curry. This made me feel the severity of inflation once again.
Under these circumstances, I honestly doubt how much the goal of a 1 million yen increase in five years will resonate with citizens who are struggling with their current cost of living. Rather than future goals, shouldn't they have presented more concrete measures on how to raise wages every year?
Mr. Koizumi is advocating for the promotion of domestic investment, and as part of that, he is proposing 'immediate depreciation of capital investment.' This is a system where, when a company makes a capital investment, the entire cost can be recorded (depreciated) as an expense in the year the investment is made, and Mr. Motegi is making a similar argument.
I am also in full agreement with reviewing the depreciation methods for corporate capital investment. However, I do not believe 'immediate depreciation' is the optimal solution.
For example, if a company with 10 billion yen in sales introduces 3 billion yen worth of equipment to improve productivity, I feel it is a bit excessive to record the entire 3 billion yen as an expense all at once, even though its value still remains.
What I have been advocating for some time is a 'free depreciation tax system.' This is a system that allows companies to freely set the depreciation period according to the actual useful life of the equipment. It would be like, 'two years for a machine that will only be used for two years,' or 'ten years if it will be used for ten years.'
Under the current 'statutory depreciation,' the useful life is uniformly set by law, such as 'four years for a PC,' which is disconnected from the reality of replacing them in about two years. This gap is one of the reasons companies continue to use old equipment.
From the perspective of stimulating the economy quickly, I understand the intent behind immediate depreciation, but speaking from my experience as a former president of a listed company, I believe a 'free depreciation tax system' is more in line with reality. Regarding this balance sheet reform, my direction is the same as Mr. Koizumi's and Mr. Motegi's.
Mr. Koizumi's strategy this time seems to be to avoid putting forward edgy, concrete policies and instead to soften the overall policy package so that as many people as possible can support it. He is likely trying to avoid the clear division between those who can support him and those who cannot that occurs when one strongly advocates for specific policies.
Kodera:
However, regarding child policy, young carers and the disability welfare sector are clearly mentioned in the pamphlet, and I think that is a point where your thinking is close to Mr. Yamada's.
Yamada:
He is also proposing the establishment of a 'Disaster Management Agency.' However, compared to other candidates, I cannot deny the impression that there were few 'punchy policies' that we should convey to voters. Even while researching the policies, I felt there was less concrete information compared to other candidates.
Reconfirming each candidate's household support measures
Now, here is a summary of today's commentary. Have you understood the differences in each candidate's policies? Although it is an election to choose the president of the Liberal Democratic Party, it is also about choosing the head of the ruling party, that is, the Prime Minister, and it greatly affects the lives of all citizens.
How did you view the differences in those policies? I will definitely read all the opinions you have provided in the chat section and use them as a reference for my own vote.
Let's review the key points of the household support measures this time once again.
Uniform cash benefits: None of the candidates are proposing this, so it has disappeared from the options.
Gasoline tax cuts: All candidates have clearly stated they will implement this.
-
Benefits/Tax cuts:
Ms. Takaichi advocates for a 'fixed-amount' tax credit with benefits, which is a form that also supports low-income earners.
Mr. Kobayashi is proposing a 'fixed-rate' tax cut.
Mr. Hayashi's 'Universal Credit' is similar to a tax credit with benefits, but it is a more finely designed system.
-
Wage Hikes:
Mr. Hayashi has set a goal of a "1% increase in real wages," but specific methods have not yet been presented.
Mr. Koizumi is advocating for an "average wage increase of 1 million yen."
Mr. Motegi is also calling for the necessity of wage hikes.
-
Others:
Mr. Koizumi has clearly stated he will implement measures for the "annual income barrier," which is an extension of his promise to the Democratic Party for the People.
Mr. Motegi has adopted a unique approach called "decentralization," aiming to solve issues specific to each region.
Why is no one talking about a "consumption tax cut"?
And this is the point that I personally find most disappointing. With so many candidates, not a single one can put forward a "consumption tax cut." I may sound persistent, but I believe whether the Liberal Democratic Party can truly change depends on whether it can cut into this consumption tax issue.
Within the party, there have been various discussions in the past, such as a one-year limited tax cut, a plan to zero-rate only food products, or the 5% flat reduction that I advocate.
Regardless of the method, the question is whether they have the stance to face the public's dissatisfaction head-on and try to gain support. However, in this presidential election, a consumption tax cut seems to have been effectively "sealed off."
Kodera:
Over the past week, I have also been researching the videos and policies of each candidate, but with five candidates, the speaking time in debates and such is only about one minute per person, and honestly, the reality is that superficial answers that just trace the pamphlets continue.
To understand the policies deeply, there was no choice but to gather information that the candidates themselves are putting out on YouTube and blogs. In that sense, the format where information on each candidate is lined up and Mr. Yamada sets the axis for explanation was very easy to understand, wasn't it?
Yamada:
Even in media reports, we rarely see concrete comparisons centered on household support measures, such as "flat rate vs. fixed amount" or "benefits vs. wage hikes."
Kodera:
That's right. There are inevitably many discussions on axes of conflict like diplomatic issues or conservative vs. liberal ideologies, and there were hardly any comparisons of policies closely related to concrete daily life.
Yamada:
However, if you look at public opinion polls, the top concerns of the public are all about money, such as measures against rising prices, anxiety about the future, and pension issues. If that is the case, shouldn't we first compare and examine those issues head-on to meet the public's expectations?
The path to restoring trust is not through inward-looking reform
Kodera:
Mr. Koizumi was putting party reform at the forefront, but I couldn't fully understand how he would specifically resolve the current distrust in the LDP.
Yamada:
I believe that trust cannot be restored through "inward-looking reform" that tries to solve the LDP's problems from within the party. It goes without saying that we should reflect on the trust lost due to issues like the slush fund scandal, but we cannot regain it just by expressing apologies.
Even if we carry out internal reforms like tightening rules, from the public's perspective, it just becomes "That's just the LDP's ego" or "It has nothing to do with our lives."
The only way to regain trust is not about the party itself, but to put forward positive policies to improve Japan, enrich the daily lives of the people, and "deliver results." I believe it depends on whether we can demonstrate that resolve through action.
How was today's explanation? I look forward to your opinions and any points you might have, such as "this explanation is wrong." As a member of the Diet belonging to the LDP, I must also cast a responsible vote, so I will use your voices as a reference.
Kodera:
So, Mr. Yamada, your own stance has not been decided yet, has it?
Yamada:
Not yet. While listening to everyone's opinions, I want to determine which candidate best matches my own policies and, above all, which candidate can "realize" those policies.
On next week's "San Channel," a new president should be decided. I think I will be able to report to you again at that time. Thank you very much for today.