Japan to enhance control over privately owned land on remote islands

Good idea.

480 islands. I had no idea it was that many.

and imposing restrictions on land sales to foreigners in such areas

Interesting, but I wonder if this would be unconstitutional. Especially considering that the government is already permitted to compulsorily purchase these islands if they are important to national security. It seems rather odd to argue that the islands are important enough to justify setting aside basic freedoms guaranteed in the constitution but not important enough to compulsorily purchase.

"...such as foreigners setting up bases from which to engage in fish poaching."

What if they are residents of Japan with proper visas or PR?

"restrictions on land sales to foreigners in such areas"

Good idea. And let's have reciprocity: The US should ban sales of land on Hawaii's small islands to Japanese nationals.

Yes, me too, I'm all for reciprocity. Does Shirayama Shokusan still own County Hall in London? In the early 2000's they denied war veterans access to the war memorial inside.

Japan can't do anything about Dokdo and the Southern Kuril islands. But they've got that small coral with the cement on top in the middle of the Pacific.

Just wait .... At the end they Gov. will use it for military buildup or give the land to the US for free (for US Army training, "test"-bombing it )

If you own land as I do .... I pay land tax quarterly ... Am i missing something here ?

Just put JASDF and US marines out there in different islands this way they get all the training they need without issues,, start with the Senakus.

JeffLeeNov. 26 06:35 pm JST"...such as foreigners setting up bases from which to engage in fish poaching."

What if they are residents of Japan with proper visas or PR?

Good question.

"restrictions on land sales to foreigners in such areas"

Good idea. And let's have reciprocity: The US should ban sales of land on Hawaii's small islands to Japanese nationals.

So your idea of "reciprocity" to restricting land sales of areas that pose a security risk, to simply banning sales to foreign nationals? I doubt any foreigner (or even non-foreigner) could buy land right next to any US military installation if it were deemed a security risk.

Cosmos1, you are missing something. It seems there is no tax on forest land. As there is no tax, often no government office even cares who owns the land and no one knows or cares where the owner is. If there were any unpaid tax, the government could through the courts force the sale of the land to settle unpaid taxes.

Imagine some Ivan buying some island land for exotic vegetables gardening, but then after a year it turns out Ivan was setting up a military base on the land, and that's dame, m'kay?

A little too late.., but still a good effort...

After all.., "occupancy" is the basis of "ownership"...

If any property is not "used".., or occupied.., it must be "defended".., to keep ownership...

Such is the law of nature and life...

All animals and plants... live by that rule...