# Hanko: Why Japan Signs With a Seal > A hanko is a personal or company seal used alongside or instead of a signature on Japanese documents. It is usually explained as tradition. The actual reason is a gap in the legal infrastructure: Japan has no government register of signatures, so a disputed signature cannot be checked and the seal can. - **Source:** https://www.silkdrive.com/insights/hanko-japanese-seals - **Author:** Patric Sawada - **Published:** 2026-09-06 - **Category:** Cross-Cultural Training - **Topics:** hanko, inkan, japanese seal, japanese contracts, japanese business culture, cross-cultural training ## Summary - A hanko is a seal used together with a name, or instead of a signature, on applications, agreements and other formal and legal documents in Japan - The usual explanation, tradition, is not the explanation. Japan has no government system for registering signatures, so a disputed handwritten signature cannot be checked against a register - A registered seal can be checked, which is why the seal rather than the signature is the mark that carries authority in a dispute - Japan applies freedom of contract and no Japanese law requires a contract to be in writing, so a contract is in principle effective by word of mouth. The seal is about proof, not about validity - The same seal appears in the approval process: a ringi-sho circulates and each recipient marks approval on it as it moves - Practice is moving to electronic approval, so the question to ask a counterpart is how they sign now, not where the seal is kept A *hanko*, also called an *inkan*, is a seal carrying a name, pressed in red ink onto a document. Writing for the EU-Japan Centre for Industrial Cooperation, Matsuzaki describes individuals and companies in Japan using seals together with their name, or instead of signatures, on applications, agreements and other formal and legal documents. Almost every explanation a European meets stops at tradition. The explanation that helps is a gap in the legal infrastructure. ## The reason is a gap in the infrastructure Matsuzaki sets it out plainly: **Japan has no government system for registering signatures**. So a handwritten signature that is later disputed cannot be checked against any register. There is nothing authoritative to compare it to. A registered seal can be checked. That is the whole mechanism. The seal is not preferred because it is old or because it is beautiful. It is the mark that can be proved when someone denies having agreed, and the signature is the one that cannot. Once you see it that way, the practice stops looking ceremonial and starts looking like what it is, which is a system doing the job that signature verification does elsewhere. ## The seal is about proof, not validity The second thing Matsuzaki records is the one that surprises people. **Japan applies the principle of freedom of contract, and no Japanese law requires a contract to be in writing**, so a contract in Japan is in principle legally effective by word of mouth. So the sealed document is not what makes the agreement exist. It is what makes it provable. A European who assumes the paperwork is the deal has the relationship the wrong way round, and a European who assumes a verbal agreement in Japan is casual has it wrong in the other direction. This page describes how a named author writing for the Centre sets out the position. It is not legal advice, and a real transaction wants a Japanese lawyer rather than an explainer. ## Where you will actually see it Inside the approval process. The *ringi-sho* is prepared by someone at middle-management level, states the pertinent facts and accumulated knowledge, carries a recommendation, and circulates upward and horizontally with each recipient marking approval as it passes. A Centre speaker describes the same thing from the buyer's side: one person gathers information, the team collects opinions around the company, and a decision sheet literally circulates through departments. The seal is how each stage records that the document passed through it. That is why the proposal you sent can be moving for weeks with nothing visibly happening: it is being marked, desk by desk. The full mechanism is in our guide to [the ringi approval process](/insights/ringi-japanese-approval-process), and the informal groundwork that has to happen first is [nemawashi](/insights/nemawashi-japanese-decision-making). ## What has changed Physical seals have been giving way to electronic approval workflows since the administrative push to strip seal requirements out of Japanese procedure. The underlying logic has not changed, because the signature-register gap it works around has not changed; what has changed is the object doing the work. The practical consequence for a European is small and specific. Ask a counterpart how they execute documents now rather than assuming either answer. A firm still running physical seals will tell you, and a firm that has moved will find a question about where the seal is kept a decade out of date. ## Related concepts - [Ringi: the Japanese approval process, explained](/insights/ringi-japanese-approval-process), the document the seal travels on - [Japanese business contracts, explained](/insights/japanese-business-contracts-explained), what the written agreement does and does not settle - [Nemawashi: how Japanese decision-making really works](/insights/nemawashi-japanese-decision-making), the groundwork that happens before any of this paper moves - [Japanese business terms: a glossary for European executives](/insights/japanese-business-terms-glossary), the wider vocabulary The cultural layer underneath all of them is in our [working guide to Japanese business culture](/insights/japanese-business-culture). ## Where this comes from The description of seal use, the freedom-of-contract point and the signature-register explanation all come from Matsuzaki, writing on Japanese contract law for the EU-Japan Centre for Industrial Cooperation. The ringi-sho circulation is described by Glisby in Centre material and independently by Pang in Centre webinar 213. The move toward electronic approval is carried in our existing Japan material and is stated here without a figure attached, because none of our sources gives one. ## Frequently asked questions ### What is a hanko? A hanko, also called an inkan, is a seal carrying a name, pressed in ink onto a document. Writing for the EU-Japan Centre, Matsuzaki describes individuals and companies in Japan using seals together with their name, or instead of signatures, on applications, agreements and other formal and legal documents. ### Why does Japan use seals instead of signatures? Because of what can be verified afterwards. Matsuzaki explains that Japan has no government system for registering signatures, so a handwritten signature that is later disputed cannot be checked against any register. A registered seal can be. The seal is not preferred for aesthetic or traditional reasons; it is the mark that survives a dispute, and that is an infrastructure fact rather than a cultural one. ### Does a Japanese contract have to be in writing and sealed? No. Matsuzaki states that Japan applies the principle of freedom of contract and that no Japanese law requires contracts to be in writing, so a contract in Japan is in principle legally effective by word of mouth. The written and sealed document is about being able to prove what was agreed, not about the agreement existing. This is a description of how a named author writing for the EU-Japan Centre sets out the position, not legal advice. ### Where does the seal appear in a Japanese approval process? On the ringi-sho, the circulating approval document. It is prepared at middle-management level, states the facts and carries a recommendation, then moves upward and horizontally with each recipient marking approval as it goes. A Centre speaker describes the same thing from the buyer side: a decision sheet literally circulates through departments. The seal is how each stage records that it has passed. ### Do I need a hanko to do business with a Japanese company? Not as a European counterparty, and nothing in our sources says otherwise. Practice is also moving: physical seals have been giving way to electronic approval workflows. The useful question to put to a counterpart is how they execute documents now, because a firm that has moved to electronic approval will find a question about the physical seal dated.