Large beer companies and the Japan Fair Trade Commission have been keeping an eye on simultaneous price increases many times in the past.

Up until now, the four major beer companies have repeatedly revised the prices of beer and other products at roughly the same time in line with changes in alcohol tax rates due to revisions to the Liquor Tax Law. However, looking at the past 10 years, in 2018, 2022, and 2025, when there was no change in the liquor tax rate, all companies have worked together to raise shipping prices.

Four beer companies suspected of being part of a cartel have been adjusting shipping prices for several years - Forced investigation with potential for criminal charges, FTC

In the spring of 2018, the four companies raised the prices of beer and other products, citing the National Tax Agency's restrictions on excessively low sales that go below cost. All companies raised prices simultaneously in October 2022 and April 2025, citing rising raw material and transportation costs.

Pricing details have not been made public. However, a senior official at the National Liquor Wholesalers Association, an industry group made up of wholesalers of commercial alcoholic beverages, says, ``Prices are always raised by the same amount.''

An official at the Fair Trade Commission says they have been watching closely for many years as the four major beer companies raise beer prices at roughly the same level.

The companies raised the prices of beer in 1990 and 1994, and for happoshu in 2003, at roughly the same time and by the same amount. At the time, the Japan Fair Trade Commission said the three price increases were synchronized, and requested the companies to report the reasons under the Antimonopoly Act. All four companies cited rising costs in 1990 and increases in liquor taxes in 1994 and 2003, and the JFTC never recognized them as cartels.

In 2005, the Japan Fair Trade Commission abolished the system that required companies to report the reasons for synchronous price increases, arguing that the deterrent force against price adjustments was insufficient.