Japan says adult video games alone don’t warrant a bank blockade, but won’t act yet

The game is sold. The money exists. The bank does not hand it over. And the Japanese tax authorities, meanwhile, continue to count that amount as taxable income.

That contradiction—selling, not collecting, and taxing equally—is what led a group of Japanese developers to Video Games for adults to the Japan Financial Services Agency (FSA). October 28, 2026, former Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly lawmaker and freedom of expression activist Zenko Kurishita recounted how the meeting with legislators and agency officials went.

The answer has two layers: The first sounds like a back-up: selling adult content, on its own, shouldn’t be a reason for a bank to deny its services. The second cools enthusiasm: the government doesn’t consider the phenomenon widespread enough to take action.

What the FSA said (and what it didn’t)

There was no formal prohibition or deadline for banks to change their criteria. According to Kurishita’s account, officials stressed that entities should analyze the risk of each transaction and not apply a categorical veto for the type of content.

A bank may reject a particular transfer if it detects a real risk; what the FSA considers inappropriate is to reject it only because the customer sells adult games: eroge, visual novels, or titles with explicit scenes. It’s a subtle distinction, but it’s a key tool for discussing a decline.

There is also a limit to the information available: what is known comes from the account of Kurishita and the creators present, not from an official statement from the FSA.

The problem: charging in Japan for selling in the world

The phenomenon has a name: debanking. In simple terms, a bank stops providing services to a customer who has not been accused of anything illegal. It can deny them a new account, freeze an existing one, or block an international transfer.

In Japan, the pattern has been repeated for years among small adult content studios. The circuit is often the same: the game is sold on Steam; a foreign publisher, often based in Taiwan, manages the international version; the proceeds are sent to Japan; the receiving bank holds them or returns them. Some banks have explicitly cited adult content. Others have not given any reason.

Behind the names are small circles, many of a single person, that depend on digital sales to keep working. They are not large corporations with a legal department capable of fighting every operation.

The cases that are already known

Here are some of the cases reported by Japanese and international media:

• Nupuryu, creator of Ruins Seeker, denounced in August 2026 that Rakuten Bank refused a transfer from its Taiwanese publisher despite having delivered the requested documentation. The bank did not explain why.
• Mai Itsuki, of the circle Ren, saw Resona Bank suspend all transfers related to international versions of its games. The entity spoke of “certain risks” without detailing them.
• Mousou no Mayu Not only was it unable to receive the proceeds from its adult version: the bank also blocked the money from the all-audience version.
• Takii Noame, responsible for the yuri saga Watamari (romance between women), had to delay a new title for all audiences after Shinsei Bank and Japan Post Bank rejected the transfers. The case was later settled with another account.

In several of these cases, the common denominator is opacity: the bank does not explain what document was missing, what risk it detected, or why a transaction that was previously acceptable was no longer acceptable. Without a written reason, the creator does not know if the problem is its content, its publisher, or the country from which the money arrives.

Mistilteinn: more than a year and a half without being paid

Mistilteinn, the circle behind adult success Loop Train, was at the meeting. His case concentrates the two sides of the problem. The first: more than a year and a half without being able to receive sales from abroad. The second: the tax obligation on that money that did not arrive.

He also exposed a less visible obstacle: the difficulty of opening a bank account because it is dedicated to adult content. It is not just a matter of cashing what has already been sold, but of being able to trade tomorrow.

The tax maze is another layer of the problem. When the money does not arrive, the income can still be recorded as an account receivable. The result is a tax debt on profits that the creator cannot use. Nupuryu exemplified it with numbers: 30 million yen of profit abroad could generate about 10 million yen in taxes in Japan, even if the transfer was rejected.

It is not a fine or an administrative punishment. It is the consequence of a system that recognizes the sale before the money is available.

本日、STEAMなど海外でのゲーム販売売上が日本の銀行で受け取れない問題(いわゆるデバンキング問題)と、成人向けR18ゲームが商品だと銀行口座が作れないという問題について、当サークルが受けた状況を議員の方々と金融庁の方々に解説してきました。 後ほど、現状で各サークルができることをまとめます。

— Mistilteinn🌱IndieGameDev🎮55000本DL突破 (@MistilteinGame) October 27, 2026

An official consultation in the face of ten known cases

The meeting also served to measure the distance between what the creators denounce and what the state records. The FSA’s Financial Services Users Consultation Office had received only one query about the problem in the last year. On its first approach, Kurishita had been told that there was none.

Kurishita had already identified at least ten cases in his network alone. The difference doesn’t mean that the others don’t exist; it suggests that the complaint channel isn’t working as a thermometer. Kurishita suspects that many creators don’t know it exists or that the process is too difficult for them to try.

The FSA said it could act if it receives enough complaints, but it did not set a number. Without a public threshold, each case can still be treated as an exception. Kurishita proposed sharing information and templates so that more affected people can file formal consultations; Mistilteinn is preparing a guide with practical steps. The goal is to turn the individual complaint into a record that the government cannot ignore.

Why Japanese Banks Say No

Why does a bank reject a legal client? Entities are obliged to apply anti-money laundering controls and to assess the risk of each transaction. Adult content, especially if it comes from abroad and goes through a publisher, can trigger an additional review.

The known cases are not clandestine: they are studies that sell on regulated platforms and that, in several cases, have presented documentation to demonstrate that they comply with the rules. Even so, the bank can treat them as a risk.

That doesn’t amount to a ban. The FSA insists on individual analysis. But in practice, the criteria may be broad enough that the creator never knows what triggered it. Several banks have invoked “risks” without detailing which ones; others have remained silent. Without a written reason, challenging the decision is almost impossible.

For creators, the effect resembles indirect censorship: there is no need for a law banning content if the financial system makes it uncollectible.

The context: Steam, cards and financial censorship

This debate did not start in a bank branch. In July 2025, Steam The update coincided with a wave of retirements of adult gaming and restrictions on itch.io. Pressure from card networks was blamed as the trigger.

That precedent showed that the payment chain can function as a content filter without the need for a law. Now the discussion is repeated one link later: the bank that receives the money from the publisher. If Steam has already agreed to sell the game, why does the Japanese bank refuse to receive the profits? The answer that the creators find is that each intermediary applies its own criteria, and none of them is responsible for the whole.

What changes for creators (and what doesn’t)

For an affected person, the meeting does not change the balance immediately. The FSA did not order to release transfers or promise compensation. What may change is the claim path.

Mistilteinn announced a practical guide based on information received from the agency; Kurishita studies templates to present queries. There are also individual solutions: diversifying banks, opening accounts in other entities or looking for intermediaries. Takii Noame solved his case with a different account. They are patches that keep the business going, not a systemic response.

And there’s one caveat at the heart of it all: Just because the FSA says adult content shouldn’t be reason enough doesn’t mean banks will comply. The agency didn’t announce sanctions or a follow-up mechanism. The creator who receives a rejection will still need proof, patience, and probably another bank.