Japan’s Board of Audit has disclosed that military equipment worth roughly 1.1 trillion yen (about $6.9 billion) purchased from the United States has not been delivered to the Japan Self-Defense Forces (JSDF) despite more than five years having elapsed since contracts were concluded. The finding, made public in January 2026, raises serious concerns about procurement efficiency, operational readiness, and Japan’s heavy reliance on U.S. defense supplies.
The revelation is contained in an official audit report submitted to Japan’s parliament following a formal request from the House of Councillors. The report reviewed Foreign Military Sales (FMS) contracts signed since fiscal year 2018 and identified 118 procurement cases that remained incomplete well beyond their originally projected delivery timelines. According to the Board of Audit, most of the delays stemmed from U.S. manufacturers, forcing several JSDF units to continue operating outdated equipment as interim substitutes.
One of the most critical cases cited involved maintenance equipment for the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye airborne early warning aircraft. The audit found that equipment scheduled for delivery within the original contract period had still not arrived years later, directly affecting the Air Self-Defense Force’s ability to maintain its early warning fleet. The E-2D is a core asset in Japan’s air defense posture, tasked with monitoring airspace, detecting potential threats, and coordinating responses with fighter aircraft and ground-based systems.
The report explains that a fundamental feature of the FMS framework contributed to the problem. Delivery dates specified in FMS contracts are considered estimates rather than legally binding deadlines for the U.S. government. Once contracts are signed and payments are made, Japan has limited leverage to enforce timelines. In several cases examined, U.S. authorities unilaterally revised delivery schedules through administrative procedures, without requiring formal approval from the Japanese side.
Compounding the issue is the FMS requirement for advance payment. The audit noted that Japan had already paid the full contract amounts for most of the delayed equipment, even though delivery and, in some cases, production had not been completed. As a result, funds remained unsettled for years while equipment was neither delivered nor officially canceled. The Board of Audit warned that this created prolonged financial exposure for the Japanese government and operational risk for the Self-Defense Forces.
The report also highlighted structural weaknesses in the FMS system itself. Under the arrangement, the U.S. government acts as the contracting authority, placing orders with American defense firms on behalf of foreign buyers. Japan is not a direct party to these contracts and therefore cannot negotiate directly with manufacturers. This structure limits Japan’s visibility into production schedules, cost structures, and the precise causes of delays, reducing transparency and accountability.
During its review, the Board of Audit confirmed that Japan’s Ministry of Defense had repeatedly raised concerns with U.S. counterparts about delayed deliveries. However, these efforts resulted in limited progress, with few cases seeing meaningful acceleration. The audit urged the ministry to strengthen oversight of FMS contracts, improve internal tracking of delayed items, and better assess operational risks arising from prolonged procurement gaps.
The report further cautioned that Japan’s increasing dependence on U.S.-made platforms—including aircraft, missiles, and related support equipment—magnifies the impact of such delays. In multiple cases, JSDF units were forced to extend the service life of aging systems beyond planned retirement dates, increasing maintenance costs and reducing operational efficiency.
In response, the Ministry of Defense acknowledged the audit’s findings and said it would work more closely with U.S. authorities to improve schedule management and transparency. The Board of Audit also recommended that Japan reassess whether FMS is always the most appropriate procurement channel, particularly for support equipment and spare parts that are critical to daily operational availability.
The FMS program remains a cornerstone of U.S. arms exports, promoted as a means of ensuring interoperability, security, and standardized logistics among allies. However, the Japanese audit underscores that when U.S. production capacity is strained or American priorities shift, the system can expose partner nations to prolonged delays with significant strategic consequences.
