Get all the data you need about the real estate market in Hiroshima
SUMMARY
Yes, buying property to rent out in Hiroshima is still worth it, but mainly when we can buy a good used property in a strong location at roughly 5% to 6% gross rather than accepting thin yields simply because the apartment is central.
The biggest change is that Hiroshima no longer rewards average buying. A standardized 70 m² apartment in Naka Ward can imply only about a 4.3% gross yield, while comparable numbers around Hiroshima Station are closer to 5.4%, so a relatively small change in location and entry price can materially change the investment.
Rents are rising, but not fast enough to rescue an expensive purchase. Recent standardized data point to only modest rent growth across much of central Hiroshima, with noticeably stronger gains around the station.
Higher Japanese interest rates have made mediocre yields much harder to finance. A 5% gross return can still work for a cash buyer, while the same property can produce disappointing cash flow once a heavily leveraged investor pays current investment-loan rates.
Hiroshima's demographic decline is real, but it is not evenly distributed. The city is losing population overall while Naka Ward has recently grown, which makes central tenant demand much more defensible than the headline population decline suggests.
The city's 11.7% overall housing-vacancy rate looks worrying at first, but it includes several kinds of vacant stock that do not compete directly with a normal rental apartment. The bigger risk is owning an average unit in an aging or poorly connected neighborhood where tenants have plenty of alternatives.
Hiroshima Station is one of the more interesting areas today because rents have strengthened while its standardized resale-price series has recently softened. The new Minamoa complex and direct tram connection improve an already established transport hub, but paying a large redevelopment premium would wipe out much of that advantage.
Older apartments can sometimes offer better economics than new ones because rents usually fall less dramatically than purchase prices as buildings age. The catch is that repair reserves, management-association finances and future major works become just as important as the apartment itself.
Tourism is a genuine support for central Hiroshima, with record visitor numbers, overnight stays and tourism spending, but it should remain a secondary reason for buying a conventional rental. A long-term apartment should work without assuming it can later become a high-yield minpaku.
The market therefore favors patience more than speculation. We would investigate liquid used apartments near Hiroshima Station, Naka Ward, Minami Ward and other proven transport corridors hardest, hesitate around 4% gross, and treat 7% or 8% suburban yields with suspicion when the apparent bargain comes with weak resale demand.
Is buying property to rent out in Hiroshima still worth it today?
Buying property to rent out in Hiroshima can still work today, but the easy version of the trade has largely disappeared: the best central properties are expensive enough that investors now need to care much more about entry price, financing and the exact micro-location.
Hiroshima still has several things landlords want. It is a regional economic center with more than 1.1 million residents, a large employment base, universities, tourism, rail connections and a rental market that is much deeper than those of smaller Japanese cities. Rents have also been moving upward rather than collapsing.
The problem is that purchase prices have risen too. LIFULL HOME'S currently estimates a standardized 10-year-old, 70 m² condominium in Hiroshima City's Naka Ward at roughly ¥41 million. The same model gives rent of about ¥148,000 a month. Put those two numbers together and the implied gross yield is only about 4.3%.
Around Hiroshima Station, however, the equation looks better. LIFULL's standardized figures put a similar 70 m² property at roughly ¥35.9 million and rent near ¥160,000 a month, which produces an implied gross yield of about 5.4%.
Those are modelled figures rather than individual transactions, but the difference is useful. A few kilometers inside the same city can move an investor from a fairly thin 4% gross return to something above 5%.
That's where Hiroshima stands now. We still see investable deals, although buying an average apartment at an average price and assuming the rent will make the numbers work has become much harder.
| Hiroshima example | Estimated property price | Estimated monthly rent | Implied gross yield | What it tells us |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Naka Ward, 70 m², 10 years old | ~¥41.0m | ~¥148,000 | ~4.3% | Central pricing is already demanding |
| Hiroshima Station, 70 m², 10 years old | ~¥35.9m | ~¥160,000 | ~5.4% | Better rent-to-price relationship |
| Hiroshima Prefecture, 70 m², 10 years old | — | ~¥135,000 | — | City-center rents carry a clear premium |
| Investment threshold we would prefer | Property-specific | Property-specific | ~5%+ gross | Gives more room for real operating costs |
Are Hiroshima rents actually rising now?
Hiroshima rents are rising, but the increase is still modest enough that investors should not build a deal around aggressive future rent growth.
LIFULL HOME'S estimates that rents for a standardized 70 m² condominium in Naka Ward increased about 1.7% over the past three years. The pattern is more interesting than the total: after a slight decline in the first year, rents rose around 1.3% and then another 1.2%.
Around Hiroshima Station, the same dataset shows roughly 5% cumulative rent growth over three years. One of those years delivered an increase of about 3.5%, followed by another gain of roughly 1.2%.
Two things stand out. Hiroshima currently has some rent inflation rather than flat or falling rents, and the increase has been much stronger around the station than across the wider central market.
We would not underwrite a Hiroshima investment assuming 4% or 5% annual rent increases. Recent evidence supports something closer to slow rent growth in much of the city, with stronger pockets where transport, redevelopment and tenant demand overlap.
The difference gets large over a long holding period. A ¥100,000 rent growing 1.5% a year reaches only about ¥116,000 after ten years. At 4%, it would reach almost ¥148,000. Using the second assumption today would make an ordinary Hiroshima deal look far better on a spreadsheet than the market evidence justifies.
Thinking of buying real estate in Hiroshima?
Acquiring property in a different country is a complex task. Don't fall into common traps – grab our guide and make better decisions.
Have Hiroshima apartment prices already risen too far for landlords?
Hiroshima apartment prices have risen enough to squeeze yields, although the current market hardly looks like a citywide speculative boom.
LIFULL HOME'S estimates that a standardized used condominium in Naka Ward has gained only a few percent over the past three years. Depending on the specific HOME'S series used, the cumulative increase is around 3% to 5%, with most of the gain arriving during one stronger year and very little appreciation lately.
Across Hiroshima Prefecture, the same standardized measure has barely moved recently after increasing earlier in the period.
The newest asking-price data also show a wide gap between Hiroshima's districts. For a 70 m² used condominium, LIFULL HOME'S recently reported an average listing price of about ¥32.1 million in Naka Ward, ¥27.9 million in Minami Ward, ¥23.7 million in Higashi Ward and ¥21.8 million in Nishi Ward. The outer wards can fall below ¥20 million.
That spread tells us more than a citywide average. Investors currently pay a meaningful premium for central Hiroshima, while rents do not increase proportionately in every neighborhood.
Even Hiroshima Station shows why simple boom narratives do not work very well here. LIFULL's standardized station-area index has recently recorded a sharp annual price decline after two previous years of gains. One index should not be treated as a perfect transaction benchmark, but it does show that Hiroshima property prices can correct locally even while the wider city remains healthy.
For landlords, that is useful. Hiroshima has become expensive enough to require discipline, yet there is still enough variation and occasional weakness to find better entry points.
| Area | Recent average asking price for 70 m² used condo | Approx. price per m² | Relative position |
|---|---|---|---|
| Naka Ward | ~¥32.1m | ~¥460,000 | Most expensive major central ward |
| Minami Ward | ~¥27.9m | ~¥400,000 | Strong station-related demand |
| Higashi Ward | ~¥23.7m | ~¥340,000 | Lower entry price |
| Nishi Ward | ~¥21.8m | ~¥310,000 | Often better value |
| Asaminami Ward | ~¥19.3m | ~¥280,000 | Cheaper suburban market |
| Asakita Ward | ~¥14.9m | ~¥210,000 | Cheap, but weaker exit profile |
Can a Hiroshima rental property still produce a good yield?
A Hiroshima rental can still produce a decent yield, but anything around 4% gross looks thin today once we account for the costs that disappear from property advertisements.
The gross-yield calculation is simple. A ¥30 million apartment renting for ¥130,000 a month generates ¥1.56 million a year, or 5.2% gross.
The investor never keeps that entire ¥1.56 million. Condominium management fees and reserve-fund contributions are common. There is property tax, city planning tax in applicable areas, insurance, letting costs, maintenance, periods without a tenant and potentially property management fees. Older buildings can also require higher repair-reserve contributions.
A 4.3% gross yield, such as the standardized Naka Ward example above, consequently leaves a fairly narrow margin. Even moderate operating costs can push the return on the purchase price into the 3% range before financing and income tax.
A gross yield above 5% gives us more room. That is one reason the current rent-to-price relationship around Hiroshima Station looks more interesting despite the area's redevelopment premium.
There is another catch: a high advertised yield can simply compensate investors for an inferior building, poor management association, weak resale demand or a difficult location. A 7% yield in an outer suburb is not automatically better than 5% near a major employment and transport hub.
For Hiroshima today, we would rather buy a genuinely liquid apartment at around 5% to 6% gross than chase an 8% headline yield in a building we may struggle to sell ten years later.
Don't buy the wrong property, in the wrong area of Hiroshima
Buying real estate is a significant investment. Don't rely solely on your intuition. Gather the right information to make the best decision.
Have higher interest rates changed the Hiroshima buy-to-let calculation?
Higher Japanese interest rates have materially weakened leveraged buy-to-let returns in Hiroshima, and financing is now one of the biggest reasons a deal that worked a few years ago may no longer work today.
The Bank of Japan currently guides the overnight call rate around 1%. Japan spent years with policy rates around zero or below zero, so this is a significant change in the background against which property investors borrow.
Actual property-investment loans sit considerably above the Bank of Japan rate. Current lender pricing gives a sense of the range. Kyodo Housing Loan, for example, lists a standard rate of 5.50% on one of its three-year fixed rental-housing products and 5.95% on its five-year fixed option. Investor terms vary greatly by borrower, property, leverage and lender, so these figures should not be read as the rate everyone will receive.
Still, the direction is clear.
Suppose an investor buys a ¥30 million property producing a 5% gross yield. That is ¥1.5 million of annual gross rent. If most of the purchase is financed at an interest rate anywhere near 4% or 5%, interest alone begins consuming a large part of the property's gross income before principal repayment, management charges, repairs or vacancies.
A few years ago, cheap Japanese financing could rescue a mediocre rental yield. Today, leverage can just as easily destroy the cash flow.
Cash buyers therefore have a much stronger Hiroshima investment case than highly leveraged investors right now. Anyone borrowing heavily needs to judge the property on actual post-debt cash flow rather than on the comforting appearance of a 5% headline yield.
Is Hiroshima losing too many people for buy-to-let property to make sense?
Hiroshima's falling population is a real long-term risk, but central Hiroshima is holding up much better than the headline city population suggests.
The latest census preliminary figures put Hiroshima City's population at about 1.172 million, down roughly 28,000 people, or 2.4%, from the previous census. Recent resident-register data show the decline continuing, with the total falling from roughly 1.170 million to 1.165 million over the latest annual comparison.
Natural population change is clearly working against the city. Hiroshima recently recorded about 7,500 births against roughly 12,600 deaths in a year. Domestic migration excluding foreign residents was also slightly negative, with around 33,200 arrivals and 34,700 departures.
Yet the geographic pattern is far from uniform. Naka Ward actually gained population between the two latest censuses, rising about 1.1%. Hiroshima also has more than 1.21 million people present during the daytime, reflecting the commuters and students who enter the city for work and education.
That concentration is why we would be much more comfortable owning a compact rental in Naka, Minami or another well-connected employment area than relying on citywide population growth.
Hiroshima can lose residents overall while good central apartments continue attracting tenants. The weaker part of the market will probably feel demographic decline first, particularly aging outer neighborhoods where renters have many alternatives.
| Hiroshima demographic indicator | Latest useful reading | Direction | Buy-to-let implication |
|---|---|---|---|
| City population, latest census comparison | ~1.172m | -2.4% | Long-term demand headwind |
| Naka Ward population | ~144,000 | +1.1% | Central demand proving more resilient |
| Residents aged 65+ | ~27% of city | Rising | Aging becomes increasingly important |
| Annual births | ~7,500 | Low | Natural population decline continues |
| Annual deaths | ~12,600 | Higher than births | Population pressure will persist |
| Daytime population | ~1.214m | Above resident population | Jobs and commuting support the center |
Get to know the market before buying a property in Hiroshima
Better information leads to better decisions. Get all the data you need before investing a large amount of money.
Does Hiroshima's vacancy rate make being a landlord risky?
Hiroshima has plenty of vacant housing, but the vacancy data mainly tell us to avoid weak buildings and weak neighborhoods rather than abandon the rental market altogether.
Japan's Housing and Land Survey counted roughly 628,800 homes in Hiroshima City and about 73,700 vacant units. That produces an overall vacancy rate of approximately 11.7%.
The number sounds alarming until we look at what sits inside it. Vacant housing includes properties waiting to be rented or sold, second homes and homes that have effectively fallen out of normal market use. The same government survey counted about 22,300 Hiroshima City homes in the residual vacancy category that excludes rentals, homes for sale and second residences, equivalent to around 3.5% of the housing stock.
Hiroshima also has a huge apartment market. Of roughly 553,000 occupied homes in the survey, about 317,000 were in multi-unit residential buildings. Apartments therefore account for well over half of occupied housing.
So tenants are clearly not a niche population here. The city has hundreds of thousands of households already accustomed to apartment living.
What worries us is the combination of an aging population, continuing construction and a large existing housing stock. Those forces can punish mediocre properties even when prime rentals remain full.
We'd treat vacancy risk building by building. Distance from transport, unit size, age, condition, rent level and local household growth tell us much more than Hiroshima's 11.7% headline vacancy figure.
Is Hiroshima Station now the best place to buy a rental?
The Hiroshima Station area has become one of the city's strongest rental locations, although investors should be careful about paying too much for improvements that everyone already knows about.
The station has changed dramatically. JR West opened the new Minamoa station building with Hotel Granvia Hiroshima South Gate in 2025. The project contains roughly 111,000 m² of floor space across a 20-story building combining retail, hotel and transport functions.
Hiroshima Electric Railway then opened the 1.1-kilometer Ekimae Ohashi tram route. Trams now enter the second floor of the station building, connecting directly with JR circulation areas and shortening transfers between rail and the streetcar network.
Those changes improve an already important location rather than trying to create demand from scratch. Hiroshima Station serves Shinkansen passengers, regional rail commuters, tourists, office workers and residents. That gives landlords several independent sources of tenant demand.
Current rent data fit that story. LIFULL estimates that rents around Hiroshima Station have risen roughly 5% over three years, noticeably faster than the standardized increase in Naka Ward.
Purchase-price data are more complicated. The same station index has recently weakened after earlier increases. That could eventually become an opportunity if rents remain firm while resale values stop climbing.
We like Hiroshima Station as an area to search, particularly when a seller is still anchored to softer resale pricing. We would be much less interested in paying a large "redevelopment premium" merely because a listing sits near Minamoa.
The infrastructure is already there. The investment now has to work on today's price and today's rent.
Buying real estate in Hiroshima can be risky
An increasing number of foreign investors are showing interest. However, 90% of them will make mistakes. Avoid the pitfalls with our comprehensive guide.
Can tourism make a Hiroshima property much more profitable?
Hiroshima's tourism boom strengthens the city's property market, but ordinary long-term landlords should treat tourism as extra demand rather than the main reason to buy.
Hiroshima City recorded about 14.76 million tourist visits in the latest full-year statistics released by the city, the highest level in its series. That was roughly 2.9% above the previous year.
Foreign tourism also reached a record, at about 2.56 million visitors. Even more telling, approximately 7.1 million visitors stayed overnight. The city's estimated tourism spending reached roughly ¥421 billion, up about 5% from the previous year.
This is now a large part of the local economy rather than a temporary post-pandemic rebound. Visitor numbers rose from roughly 12.3 million to 14.3 million and then 14.8 million across the latest three comparable years. Foreign tourism jumped particularly sharply before growth slowed to around 2% in the latest year.
Hotels, restaurants, shops and transport operators benefit directly. Residential landlords benefit more indirectly through employment, demand around central transport hubs and the broader attractiveness of Hiroshima as a place to live and work.
Short-term accommodation is a different investment. Japan's minpaku rules, local regulations, building-management rules and the operational burden can radically change the economics. A conventional condominium should never be purchased on the assumption that it can automatically be converted into a high-yield Airbnb.
We see tourism as a genuine plus for central Hiroshima property, especially around the station and major visitor corridors. A long-term rental should still make financial sense without tourists sleeping in the apartment.
| Hiroshima tourism measure | Earlier level | Latest level | Change we care about |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total visitors | ~12.3m | ~14.8m | Strong multi-year recovery |
| Previous-year visitors | ~14.3m | ~14.8m | +2.9% |
| Foreign visitors | ~1.48m two years earlier | ~2.56m | Major structural rebound |
| Overnight visitors | ~5.68m two years earlier | ~7.12m | Much larger overnight economy |
| Tourism spending | ~¥326bn two years earlier | ~¥421bn | Roughly ¥95bn increase |
| Spending per visitor | ~¥26,500 two years earlier | ~¥28,500 | Higher visitor value as well as volume |
Should investors buy an old Hiroshima apartment to get a higher yield?
Older Hiroshima apartments can offer the better numbers, but we would only accept the extra age when the building itself passes a much stricter test.
The rent discount from age is often smaller than the purchase-price discount. That can improve yield.
LIFULL's current Naka Ward model illustrates the point. A standardized 70 m² condominium is estimated to rent for about ¥159,000 a month at three years old, around ¥148,000 at ten years and roughly ¥134,000 at twenty years.
Rent therefore falls about 16% between the three-year and twenty-year examples.
The purchase price of the same standardized 70 m² unit drops from roughly ¥44.4 million at three years old to about ¥36.2 million at twenty years old, a decline closer to 18%.
That alone can slightly improve the rent-to-price relationship as the building ages. Individual properties can show a much larger difference when sellers discount an unpopular older unit.
The risk sits elsewhere. Japanese condominium owners contribute to the building's management and long-term repair reserve. Aging buildings eventually need exterior work, waterproofing, elevators, plumbing and other expensive common-area repairs. If the reserve fund has been underfunded, monthly contributions can rise or owners can face special assessments.
We would therefore inspect the management association's accounts, long-term repair plan, reserve balance, fee history and major-work schedule before getting excited about an old Hiroshima apartment with a 6% yield.
A well-managed 20-year-old building near transport can be a much better investment than a beautiful new apartment bought at a 3.5% yield. A badly managed old building can turn that extra yield into repair bills surprisingly quickly.
Don't lose money on your property in Hiroshima
100% of people who have lost money there have spent less than 1 hour researching the market. We have reviewed everything there is to know. Grab our guide now.
How much do buying and selling costs hurt Hiroshima rental returns?
Japan's transaction costs make short holding periods unattractive, so a Hiroshima buy-to-let property usually needs several years of ownership before the economics become convincing.
Buying a Japanese property involves more than the advertised purchase price. Depending on the transaction, costs can include brokerage, registration tax, judicial-scrivener fees, real-estate acquisition tax, stamp duty, loan charges and insurance.
Brokerage alone can be meaningful. Japan's Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism sets maximum brokerage commissions under a statutory formula. For normal higher-value residential transactions, the familiar shorthand is roughly 3% of the property price plus ¥60,000, before consumption tax, although the precise legal calculation should be checked for the transaction.
A ¥30 million resale apartment can therefore generate close to ¥1 million of brokerage cost on one side of the purchase before the other acquisition expenses are added.
Selling creates friction again. Brokerage can return, and capital gains receive very different Japanese tax treatment depending partly on how long the property has been held.
This changes how we read rental yields. Imagine a property producing a 5% gross yield. If entry costs absorb several percent of the acquisition value and the investor sells after only two or three years, a large part of the rental income earned during that period simply offsets transaction friction.
Hiroshima makes more sense to us as a medium- or long-term rental market than as a place to buy an ordinary apartment, collect rent briefly and flip it.
Which parts of Hiroshima look safest for a rental investment?
The safer Hiroshima rental strategy today is to stay close to established transport, employment and dense residential demand rather than chase the cheapest apartment in the metropolitan area.
Naka Ward remains the obvious core. It contains Hiroshima's main commercial center and has recently managed to grow its population even while the city overall shrank. The drawback is price: central assets can offer disappointing yields if buyers overpay for location.
Minami Ward deserves particular attention because it includes Hiroshima Station and several surrounding residential districts. The station redevelopment, Shinkansen access and improved tram connection create an unusually broad demand base.
Nishi Ward can offer a better compromise between price and access. Current asking-price data put a typical 70 m² used condominium substantially below Naka Ward, while parts of Nishi remain close enough to central Hiroshima to attract commuters.
Higashi Ward can work as well, particularly near Hiroshima Station and rail connections, although property quality varies quickly as we move away from the strongest corridors.
The outer wards offer lower acquisition prices, but demographic and resale risks become more important. An apartment costing ¥15 million is only cheap if tenants continue wanting it and another buyer eventually wants to own it.
For a pure buy-to-let strategy, we would generally accept a slightly lower initial yield to own something within walking distance of a useful station, tram stop, employment area or university. Hiroshima's population trajectory makes that location discipline more valuable now than it was when the whole metropolitan area was expanding.
Get the full checklist for your due diligence in Hiroshima
Don't repeat the same mistakes others have made before you. Make sure everything is in order before signing your sales contract.
So, is buying property to rent out in Hiroshima still worth it?
Yes, buying property to rent out in Hiroshima is still worth it for selective investors, but we would reject a large share of the properties currently marketed as investments.
The strongest part of the case is easy to see. Hiroshima remains a major regional city with more than 1.1 million residents, a daytime population above its resident population, a huge apartment sector and record tourism. Central rents are still moving upward. Hiroshima Station has just gone through one of its most important transport and commercial upgrades in years.
The weaker side is equally clear. Hiroshima City's population is shrinking. Around 27% of residents are already 65 or older. The housing stock contains tens of thousands of vacant properties. Central apartment prices have risen enough that a standardized Naka Ward property can produce only around a 4.3% implied gross yield. Financing has also become far less forgiving now that Japanese interest rates have moved decisively away from the zero-rate environment.
The market rewards selection much more than it rewards simply owning Hiroshima real estate.
We would be interested today in a well-managed used condominium near Hiroshima Station, central Naka Ward, parts of Minami Ward or another proven transport corridor when the gross yield starts around 5% or better. We would become especially interested if the property combines that yield with a building that has healthy repair reserves and a unit size that appeals to a deep pool of local tenants.
We would hesitate at roughly 4% gross unless the property is unusually scarce or the purchase price leaves a very strong resale case. With substantial leverage, even 5% can be too weak once the cost of debt and normal property expenses are included.
Cheap suburban properties with headline yields of 7% or 8% require a different kind of caution. Hiroshima's demographic decline means the weakest locations could gradually lose both tenants and buyers. A high rent yield will not compensate for much if the asset itself becomes difficult to exit.
Our conclusion is fairly sharp: Hiroshima still works as a buy-to-let city, but it currently looks better for patient investors buying good used properties at sensible prices than for buyers chasing new apartments, heavy leverage or superficially high suburban yields. Around 5% to 6% gross in a liquid central location is the part of the market we would investigate hardest. Below that, the margin for error is getting uncomfortable.
OUR METHODOLOGY
This analysis tests whether buying a Hiroshima property for long-term rental still makes economic sense today. We compare purchase prices with rents and implied gross yields, then test those returns against financing costs, demographics, housing vacancy, building age, transaction costs, infrastructure and likely resale liquidity.
For the rent-to-price comparisons, we use LIFULL HOME'S standardized market series for Naka Ward and Hiroshima Station. These figures model comparable properties by age and size, which makes them useful for comparing locations and changes over time, but we do not treat them as individual completed transactions. Current LIFULL listing data are used separately to show how asking prices differ across Hiroshima's wards.
Population and housing risk are assessed using Hiroshima City's census, population and statistical data together with the Statistics Bureau of Japan's Housing and Land Survey. We distinguish the city's overall population decline from the stronger performance of central districts such as Naka Ward, and we separate the headline housing-vacancy rate from the narrower category of homes that have effectively dropped out of normal rental, sale or second-home use.
Financing is treated as a separate part of the investment rather than hidden inside the property yield. We use the Bank of Japan's current monetary-policy setting to establish the interest-rate environment and Kyodo Housing Loan's published rental-housing loan rates as an example of the borrowing costs an investment property can face. Actual loan terms still depend heavily on the borrower, leverage and property.
For Hiroshima Station, we use direct information from JR West on the Minamoa station redevelopment and from Hiroshima Electric Railway on the Ekimae Ohashi tram route. These projects are considered useful only where they strengthen existing transport and tenant demand; we do not automatically assume that redevelopment justifies a higher purchase price.
Tourism is measured from Hiroshima City's official tourism statistics, including visitors, foreign visitors, overnight stays and tourism spending. We treat tourism as support for central employment and property demand rather than converting hotel or visitor growth directly into assumptions about long-term residential rents.
Older condominium risk is assessed using Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism guidance on condominium management, long-term repair plans and repair reserves. Transaction friction is also included using the ministry's statutory brokerage-remuneration rules and National Tax Agency guidance on property-sale taxation. Japan Tourism Agency minpaku guidance is used when distinguishing a conventional long-term rental from short-term accommodation.
Key sources used for this analysis include: LIFULL HOME'S on standardized used-condominium prices in Naka Ward, LIFULL HOME'S on Naka Ward rents, LIFULL HOME'S on Hiroshima Station resale prices, LIFULL HOME'S on Hiroshima Station rents, Hiroshima City's preliminary census results, the Statistics Bureau of Japan's Housing and Land Survey, the Bank of Japan's monetary-policy statement, Kyodo Housing Loan's published rates, JR West on the Hiroshima Station redevelopment, Hiroshima Electric Railway on the new station tram route, Hiroshima City's tourism statistics, and MLIT guidance on condominium management and repair planning.
Don't sign a document you don't understand in Hiroshima
Buying a property over there? We have reviewed all the documents you need to know. Stay out of trouble - grab our comprehensive guide.
Related blog posts
- What rental yield can you get in Hiroshima now?
- How much is rent in Hiroshima now?
- Is Hiroshima a good place to live as an expat?
- Is now a good time to buy property in Hiroshima?
- What are the biggest risks when buying property in Hiroshima?
