BYD (Japan) President: Discriminatory Subsidy Policies Are Unfair to Everyone
The Japanese media outlet DIAMOND online published an interview with BYD (Japan) President Atsuhira Atsukawa on August 1st.
Lately, BYD's lightweight electric vehicle tailored for the Japanese market has attracted widespread attention due to its advanced features and low price. At the same time, criticism has erupted over Japan's government "electric vehicle subsidy" policy, which is perceived as discriminatory.
How does BYD, as a party allegedly discriminated against, view this subsidy policy? The response from BYD (Japan) President Atsuhira Atsukawa is surprisingly unexpected.
The "Sea Otter 200," priced at a manufacturer-recommended retail of 2,145,000 JPY, surprised the market. With a national EV subsidy of 150,000 JPY, the effective purchase cost drops to 1,995,000 JPY—under 2 million JPY.
In the lightweight EV segment, domestic Japanese manufacturers such as Nissan’s "Sakura," Mitsubishi’s "eK Cross EV," and Honda’s "N-ONE e:" have already entered the market. However, with BYD—a newcomer—leveraging price competitiveness and rich configurations to aggressively enter the market, competition in Japan’s lightweight EV sector has entered a new phase.
Meanwhile, online debates in Japan about the EV subsidy system have intensified. Comments like “Subsidies should only apply to domestically produced vehicles,” “It’s absurd to subsidize foreign-made cars,” “Subsidies are taxpayer money—should we really be subsidizing personal purchases?” “Only EVs receive excessive priority,” and “Subsidies are unfair to those who don’t buy cars” have gained traction.
These arguments carry some weight. Since subsidies come from tax revenue, disputes over “who gets it and why” are inevitable.
So how does BYD view the subsidy policy amid all this? In fact, the answer is somewhat surprising.
BYD Automobile Japan President Atsuhira Atsukawa revealed that he had exchanged views with the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) regarding the subsidy system. Atsukawa stated: “We did not request the elimination of discrimination or increased subsidies for BYD.” Instead, “I hope the budget is also allocated toward building charging infrastructure.”
“Charging stations should be standard amenities in shopping centers. Charging should also be available at highway service areas. With such an environment, EVs can travel with greater peace of mind.”
“The barriers to EV adoption go beyond vehicle prices. Limited charging infrastructure, high failure rates, long waiting times—all these create anxiety not just for current EV users, but also for potential buyers.”
“Vehicle subsidies benefit only those who purchase cars. Once charging infrastructure is established, it becomes a shared social asset for all EV users.”
President Atsukawa also mentioned other incentives such as road toll discounts. “Reducing EV tolls on highways would help, but this cannot be decided by METI alone—it requires coordination among multiple ministries including Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism.”
“In short, Japan’s EV policy remains unclear—vehicle policy, energy policy, and road policy operate independently across different departments.”
“Shouldn’t we take a broader, forward-looking approach to designing an environmentally sustainable society?”
On the other hand, President Atsukawa also expressed dissatisfaction with the discriminatory nature of the subsidy system toward BYD.
He said: “It seems the government has drawn a red line specifically for BYD, making it harder for BYD users to qualify for subsidies.”
“We’re not asking for more subsidies. We simply want the government to disclose the subsidy criteria.”
“Under the current EV subsidy system, manufacturers receive results after review, but no specific evaluation standards are provided. Assessments are marked with ‘○,’ ‘△,’ and ‘×’ symbols, and only the final score and subsidy amount are communicated.”
“The Sea Otter received a 150,000 JPY subsidy, while the Nissan Sakura received 574,000 JPY—an 424,000 JPY difference. For consumers considering a purchase, there’s no convincing explanation for such a gap.”
According to President Atsukawa, BYD has been requesting disclosure of scores and criteria for each evaluation item for approximately two years.
“If manufacturers don’t know what they need to improve to get higher subsidies, they won’t know where to focus their efforts.”
“Besides vehicle performance metrics like range and fuel efficiency, local presence in Japan should also be considered. Evaluation systems should include aspects such as sales networks, maintenance infrastructure, disaster response capabilities, and human resource development. Cars aren’t one-time products—they come with ongoing support systems.”
“BYD has implemented various initiatives in Japan, including signing disaster relief agreements with local governments and training technicians. Yet, under the current system, these efforts appear insufficiently recognized.”
“If evaluation criteria were clear, manufacturers could improve accordingly and explain subsidy differences to customers. Conversely, without transparency, no one can explain why subsidies vary based on the manufacturer.”
“Even within the same model type, differences in subsidies exist due to brand variations.”
“Moreover, other Japanese brands manufactured in China—equipped with BYD batteries—receive higher subsidies, while BYD-branded models receive lower ones. Dealerships can’t clearly explain this to customers.”
“Subsidies are funded by taxes. I believe a discriminatory subsidy system lacking clear criteria is problematic. It must be transparent not only to manufacturers but also to consumers and taxpayers. Fairness must be demonstrated not just through outcomes, but through detailed processes.”
“Who is the EV subsidy system designed for? Should limited tax funds be used to reduce vehicle prices or to develop infrastructure? President Atsukawa’s remarks may well prompt Japanese society to re-evaluate the standards and purposes of the EV subsidy system.”
Original article: toutiao.com/article/1872296884326410/
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.