Supplier due diligence
Japanese Subsidiary and Affiliate Checks
Group structures can create false matches. This guide explains how to separate a contracting entity from affiliates and similarly named companies.
Key takeaways
- A group brand may not be the contracting legal entity.
- Public records for affiliates should not be automatically attached to the counterparty.
- Corporate Number, registered name, and address context are critical.
- Document relationship assumptions and uncertainty.
Practical workflow
- 1Identify the exact entity that signs, invoices, ships, or performs services.
- 2Search each relevant group entity separately when names are similar.
- 3Compare Corporate Number, address, and company profile context.
- 4Review whether public records attach to the contracting entity or an affiliate.
- 5Escalate group-level ambiguity before relying on the match.
Why group-company confusion happens
Japanese groups may use shared brands, similar names, common addresses, and multiple subsidiaries. A public record for one group company may be relevant context, but it may not legally attach to another entity.
For due diligence, the first question is which legal entity creates the relationship you are approving.
How to document affiliate context
Document the searched entities, names, Corporate Numbers, addresses, websites, and source URLs. If a record is treated as affiliate context rather than direct entity history, say so explicitly in reviewer notes.
Important limitation
RegBase supports public-source screening and evidence collection. It is not a credit report, sanctions result, legal opinion, or final due-diligence conclusion.