Japan spouse visa requirements

Five things. A legally valid, registered marriage to a Japanese national; a genuine ongoing relationship you can evidence; the means to support your household (no fixed income figure); a guarantor in Japan, who for this visa is the Japanese spouse; and no immigration ground for refusal, with a truthful application. There is no points test, no income threshold, and no language requirement. The examination is mainly about whether the marriage is real and the household is viable.

No. no statutory threshold; ~¥2.4–3M/year household income is the practitioner comfort zone. The ISA publishes no figure; it reviews the supporter's tax certificates against your declared living costs and asks whether the household plan adds up. Any site stating a fixed amount as "the requirement" is repeating folklore. The income page covers savings, supporters abroad, and no-tax-record cases in full.

No. The requirement is that the household can be supported, not that the Japanese spouse is employed. Support can be documented through savings, income from abroad, the applicant's own funds, or a parent or in-law added as a second supporter on the form. A spouse who is a student, between jobs, or not working can still sponsor when the money is shown to be there.

Neither is a formal requirement. The whole point of the visa is to let a couple begin living together in Japan, so most applicants are not yet doing so. Cohabitation history helps demonstrate a genuine relationship, and if you have lived apart, whether for work, study, or visa reasons, you explain why in the questionnaire. It is something to account for, and it does not disqualify you.

The spouse status is for living in Japan as the spouse of a Japanese national, so it is not designed for staying abroad indefinitely. First, the practical clock: the COE must be used to land in Japan within 3 months from date of issue, or it expires. After you have the status, prolonged time outside Japan without re-entry permission ends it, and a renewal expects you to actually be living the marriage in Japan. If your plan is to remain abroad for now, the spouse visa is the wrong moment to apply.

No. There is no language requirement for the "Spouse or Child of Japanese National" status, and no test, certificate, or interview to gauge your Japanese. (Language ability is not a factor here; it only enters the conversation much later, and only for naturalisation, which is a separate process from this visa.)

No. Living with relatives, in a company dormitory, or in shared housing does not block a spouse application. What the application needs is an address in Japan to put on the form; it does not have to be a lease in the Japanese spouse's name. A stable, plausible living arrangement reads better than an impressive one.

Not in itself. A recent marriage or a relationship built largely online is approved routinely. Because both raise the genuineness question, you answer it with evidence: a detailed relationship history in the questionnaire, communication records over time, photos from the times you were together, and travel records. The weaker the in-person history, the more the paper record has to carry. This is what the questionnaire is designed to capture.

No, none of these disqualifies you. They are among the factors that can draw closer scrutiny of whether the marriage is genuine, so the response is the same as for a recent or long-distance marriage: document the relationship thoroughly and explain the circumstances honestly. Immigration is checking that the marriage is authentic; it is not judging its shape.

No. The "Spouse or Child of Japanese National" status requires a legally registered marriage recognised under Japanese law. A de-facto or common-law relationship (内縁) does not qualify, however long-standing. Long-term partners in that situation are sometimes considered under the separate "Long-Term Resident" (定住者) status; that is a different, discretionary route, and a specialist is the right person to assess it.

As of 2026, a same-sex marriage between a Japanese national and a foreign partner is not recognised for this status, because the status turns on a marriage valid under Japanese law. This is an actively contested area. Several Japanese courts have ruled the bar on same-sex marriage unconstitutional, and the situation may change. If this is your circumstance, get advice from a specialist rather than relying on a general guide; do not assume either a yes or a no from older information online.

The period of stay is 5 years, 3 years, 1 year, or 6 months. A first spouse visa is most often granted for 1 year; the longer 3- and 5-year periods typically come at renewal, once the marriage has a track record in Japan. The period is set by the ISA; it is not something you choose on the form.

No. The marriage has to be legally registered first; Japan has no "fiancé(e) visa". The usual order is to register the marriage (in Japan, in the home country, or both), get it onto the koseki, and then file for the spouse status. If you need to be in Japan together in the meantime, that is a question about a temporary visitor stay rather than the spouse visa.

Possibly. Separate from proving the marriage, the applicant must not fall under the Immigration Act's grounds for denial: certain criminal convictions, a previous deportation or overstay still within its re-entry bar, or a misrepresentation in the application itself. After a refusal, a re-application for the same purpose is not accepted for 6 months except on humanitarian grounds. A clean history is not on the checklist because it is assumed. If yours is not clean, treat it as the one part of the case to take to a licensed specialist.

No. Whether you take your spouse's surname is a personal and civil-registration choice; it has no bearing on eligibility. What matters is that the names are consistent and explained across your documents: passport, marriage certificate, koseki, and the application form. If a name differs between documents (a maiden name on the passport, a married name elsewhere), note it so the file is internally consistent rather than leaving the reviewer to wonder.