If you have been quietly planning to buy an apartment in Osaka or a townhouse in Kobe, the news out of Japan's Immigration Services Agency this summer probably reached you sideways — in a Facebook group, a WhatsApp thread from a fellow expat, or a headline you skimmed and then re-read twice. Permanent residency, the status so many foreign buyers treat as a quiet prerequisite for a normal Japanese mortgage, is being redefined. And because almost everything a bank believes about you as a borrower is downstream of your residency status, the reform matters to your property plans whether or not you have applied for PR yet.
This article does two things. First, it lays out — carefully, and with the caveats this moment deserves — what is actually changing in Japan's permanent residency framework heading into 2026 and 2027. Second, and this is the part most coverage skips, it connects those changes to how Kansai lenders actually think about foreign borrowers today, and where that thinking may be headed. None of what follows is immigration or legal advice, and it should not be read as a substitute for it. Think of it as the context you need before you have that conversation with a specialist — and before you have the parallel conversation about financing.
Here is the honest starting point: as of this writing, in September 2026, part of what is discussed online as "the 2026 PR reform" is still a draft guideline released by the Immigration Services Agency (ISA) for public comment in early August 2026, and part of it is already-enacted law from a 2024 amendment to the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act that simply has not taken effect yet. Conflating the two is the single most common mistake we see foreign residents make when they talk about this. So we will keep them separate.
The ISA's proposed revision to its permanent residency screening guidelines would, for the first time, require an applicant's household income to exceed the average for Japanese households — reporting has cited a reference figure in the ¥5.75 million range, roughly double the informal ¥3 million benchmark examiners have used in practice for years. The draft also introduces a pension-adequacy test: examiners would assess whether an applicant's projected public pension benefits reach a level equivalent to thirty years of "kosei nenkin" (Employees' Pension Insurance) contributions, with financial assets allowed to offset a shortfall in some cases, though real estate holdings reportedly would not count toward that offset.
These are draft guidelines, not statute — they were opened for public comment in August 2026, and reporting points to an implementation target around October 2026, with some sources suggesting retroactive application to applications filed from around April 2026. If that timeline holds, someone who applied for PR earlier in 2026 assuming today's informal standards could plausibly be assessed against tomorrow's tighter ones. That detail alone is worth building into any planning conversation with an immigration specialist rather than assuming your existing application is grandfathered in.
Alongside the income and pension changes, reporting describes a substantial increase to the PR application fee — from the long-standing ¥10,000 to a figure cited around ¥200,000, payable on approval rather than at filing. Numbers like this vary somewhat between sources still working from the same draft, so treat the exact yen figure as directionally accurate rather than gospel until the ISA finalizes it. But the direction is not in question: applying for permanent residency in Japan is poised to become a meaningfully more expensive, more scrutinized process than it has been for the past two decades.
Separately — and this is the piece that tends to alarm people the most — the 2024 amendment to the Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act creates a formal framework for revoking permanent residency under specific, narrow circumstances. It is scheduled to become enforceable in April 2027. The grounds described in reporting center on deliberate, sustained non-payment of taxes or social insurance premiums (national pension, health insurance) by someone who had the means to pay, serious or repeated immigration violations, and imprisonment for certain intentional crimes. Coverage consistently emphasizes that the standard is "koi" — deliberate intent — and that honest mistakes, temporary hardship, or a single missed payment are not the target. A companion change, also slated for April 2027, would raise the CEFR B1 (roughly JLPT N2) Japanese proficiency bar for certain PR routes and lengthen the residence and marriage-duration requirements for the spousal PR pathway.
The distinction matters for how you should read this whole reform: the revocation mechanism is settled law awaiting its effective date, while the income, pension, and fee thresholds are still a draft moving through public comment. Both are real. Only one is currently negotiable.
To understand why this reform ripples into your mortgage prospects, it helps to see PR the way a Japanese lender's credit desk sees it — not as an immigration milestone, but as a proxy for a specific risk they are pricing: the chance that a borrower leaves Japan, or loses the legal right to stay, well before a 30- or 35-year loan is repaid. A work visa is tied to a job, a sponsor, and a renewal cycle; permanent residency, historically, removed all three variables from the equation at once. That is why PR holders in Kansai have generally been treated, for lending purposes, close to how a Japanese national would be treated: full access to the major banks, to Flat35 (the government-backed fixed-rate program), to loan-to-value ratios of 90% or higher, and to 35-year terms without the loan being capped by a visa-expiry date.
None of that has meant PR was a hard legal prerequisite everywhere — it never has been — but in practice it has functioned as something close to a default assumption baked into how mainstream lenders underwrite. Ask most megabank loan officers whether a non-PR applicant can get a mortgage and you will usually hear some version of "it depends," which in banking language often means: possible, but slower, more conditional, and reviewed by more senior underwriters than a PR file would be.
This is the part that surprises a lot of clients: a meaningful number of long-term visa holders in Kansai do get mortgages without permanent residency, through lenders that have built specific products for exactly this borrower profile. SMBC Trust Bank's Prestia division, for instance, has a long track record of lending to work-visa holders with stable Japanese income, without requiring PR or a guarantor. Tokyo Star Bank markets a mortgage explicitly at foreign nationals without permanent residence. Suruga Bank has, at various points, taken a more flexible view of employment history and visa type than the megabanks typically do, though its overall risk appetite and pricing shift over time and should always be checked directly.
What these products tend to share, compared with PR-holder lending, is a cluster of stricter conditions rather than a flat refusal:
The honest summary is that non-PR mortgage access in Kansai is genuinely available, meaningfully more constrained, and highly lender-specific — three lenders can look at the identical applicant and reach three different conclusions. That variability is precisely why matching a borrower's actual profile to the right lender relationship tends to matter more than any single rule of thumb about visas.
Here is where we want to be careful, because no one — not a bank, not an immigration lawyer, not this article — can currently tell you with certainty how individual Japanese lenders will recalibrate their underwriting once the reform settles. What we can offer is an analytical read of the pressure points, not a prediction dressed up as one.
The interesting tension the 2027 revocation framework introduces is this: PR has functioned as a risk-removal signal precisely because it was, for practical purposes, permanent. A formal — if narrow — mechanism for revoking it is a genuine, if small, change to that assumption. It is plausible that some credit committees eventually build a soft awareness of this into how they view PR-holder files, particularly for self-employed applicants or those with more complex tax situations, where the "deliberate non-payment" ground could theoretically apply. It is equally plausible that lenders treat the bar for revocation — deliberate, sustained, willful non-compliance — as so narrow and so far from an ordinary compliant borrower's situation that it changes nothing in practice. Both readings are reasonable. Neither is confirmed. We would treat any confident claim in either direction, from anyone, with some skepticism right now.
Before this reform, the conventional wisdom for many long-term residents was straightforward: get PR when you are eligible, because it opens up better mortgage terms with almost no downside. That calculus is now genuinely more layered. If the income and pension thresholds rise substantially, some prospective applicants who would have cleared the old bar comfortably may need more time, or a different pension strategy, to clear the new one — which could mean staying on the non-PR mortgage track for longer than originally planned. Conversely, the sharply higher application fee and tighter scrutiny make it worth applying for PR deliberately and well-documented rather than reactively, since a rejected or delayed application under stricter guidelines is now a costlier setback than it used to be.
There is no universal answer to whether you should buy before or after pursuing PR — it depends on your income trajectory, your visa category, your family situation, and honestly, on timing that is currently still being finalized in Tokyo. That is a genuinely individual calculation, and it is exactly the kind of question where a generic article — including this one — should stop short of telling you what to do.
If you are a long-term visa holder in Osaka or Kobe weighing a purchase in the next one to two years, a few grounded observations are worth carrying into your planning, without treating any of them as settled fact about your specific case:
We are not immigration lawyers, and we do not prepare PR applications or give legal advice on residency status — that is precisely the kind of work we think deserves a qualified immigration lawyer or gyoseishoshi (administrative scrivener) who tracks these guideline changes daily, not a real estate agency offering an opinion. What we do, day to day, is sit at the intersection of these two systems: we know which Kansai lenders are currently the most workable for a given visa category and income profile, we know which loan officers actually understand foreign-resident files rather than defaulting to "no," and we can help you sequence a property search around a realistic financing timeline rather than an assumed one.
If you are trying to figure out what is actually possible for your specific residency status, income, and timeline — whether that means exploring a non-PR mortgage now or planning a purchase around a future PR application — we would be glad to have an honest first conversation about it. No pressure, no paperwork on our end for the immigration side, just a clearer picture of where you currently stand.
Foreigner-friendly. Bilingual. Exclusive listings.
Contact us today and move in within 2 weeks.
We have a curated selection of properties for rent and for sale across Osaka.
View properties
