The English notice asks you to vote. The voting website is in Japanese.

Of the 109 companies with an English notice, 95 give a voting website (in the English notice, or where it names none, in the Japanese notice or share-registry page) that is in Japanese only. For the other 14 the score turned on timing and our notes do not record the voting website, so they are counted neither way. None of the 128 scores 5 on this question. The websites are run by the share registrars, not the companies, and all three registrars' sites we opened are Japanese from the first page, with no switch to English.

This does not affect every foreign investor. Institutions outside Japan usually vote through their custodian, and for most listed companies through the Electronic Voting Platform run by ICJ, set up by the TSE and Broadridge (TSE ↗). At the end of March 2026, 1,807 TSE-listed companies had joined it or decided to (ICJ, in Japanese ↗). The Corporate Governance Code asks Prime Market companies to make the platform available at least to institutional investors (Supplementary Principle 1.2.4 ↗).

The registrar's website is for shareholders on the register, who log in with the details on the voting form sent to them by post. An individual who holds through a Japanese broker and does not read Japanese can read the proposals in the English notice, but cannot use the online route that notice gives. The notice is in English for readers who do not read Japanese; when the route it gives is Japanese-only, its guidance stops there.

The ICJ platform is for institutions only: individuals, foreign or Japanese, vote by post or on the registrar's website. An individual who holds Japanese shares through a broker outside Japan is not on the register (the shares sit in a custodian's or nominee's name) and can vote only if that broker passes the vote through.

• Say which route is for whom: registered shareholders vote online or by post; institutions through their custodian and the ICJ platform.
• If the voting website is in Japanese only, say so.
• Give the deadline in Japan time, with the date and the hour.
• Add an English walk-through of the Japanese screens (screenshots with English captions), or a contact who can help in English.
• Publish the English notice three weeks or more before the meeting, with the reference documents for every proposal.

Examples of a clear explanation

• Nitto Boseki Co., Ltd. 3110 — The English notice says plainly that the website it uses for voting is available in Japanese only, so an English reader knows before trying. Notice ↗
• Nissan Chemical Corporation 4021 — Explains voting by post and online in English, with the deadline in Japan time, and names the ICJ platform for institutions. Notice ↗
• Shimadzu Corporation 7701 — Names the voting website, the deadline (5:00 p.m. on 24 June) and the ICJ platform for institutions. Notice ↗

These companies’ voting websites are Japanese-only too; they are named because their notices tell an English reader accurately how voting works.

The lasting fix is for the registrars to add English screens to their voting websites: 90 of the 95 companies here use one of the three. Until then, an accurate account of the routes in the notice is what guides an English reader.

The gap continues after the meeting. 108 of the 128 companies publish little or nothing of the vote results in English (0–2 on G6): votes for, against and abstaining, and the approval ratio, for each proposal. A shareholder asked in English to vote cannot read in English how the vote went. Six gaps in English IR: vote results →