In the third week of January 2026, Japan’s 40-year government bond yield surged past 4% for the first time since the bond’s inception, eventually reaching 4.24%. The 10-year JGB yield hit 2.38%, its highest level in 27 years. It was the most violent sell-off in Japanese government debt in decades, and it sent shockwaves through bond markets in New York and London.

If you are an American or European investor, you might have dismissed this as a local Japanese story. That would be a mistake. What happens in the JGB market affects your Treasury yields, your mortgage rate, and the stability of the global fixed-income market in ways that are not immediately obvious but are profoundly important.

Japan is the world’s largest creditor nation

To understand why a bond sell-off in Tokyo matters in New York, you need to understand one fact: Japanese institutions are the largest foreign holders of US Treasuries, with approximately $1.1 trillion in American government debt. Japanese life insurers, pension funds, and banks have for decades recycled their enormous domestic savings into US and European bond markets, effectively subsidising Western borrowing costs.

This arrangement worked because Japanese domestic yields were near zero or even negative. There was no incentive to keep money at home when you could earn 4% in US Treasuries. The carry trade, borrowing cheaply in yen and investing in higher-yielding foreign assets, became one of the largest and most persistent trades in global finance.

The January JGB spike threatened to upend this arrangement. When Japanese 40-year bonds offer 4.24% and 10-year bonds offer 2.38%, the calculus changes. Japanese institutional investors now have a reason to bring capital home. And when $1.1 trillion worth of Treasury holdings faces even the possibility of gradual repatriation, every fixed-income investor in the world should pay attention.

What caused the sell-off

The trigger was the collision between two forces. On one side, Prime Minister Takaichi’s fiscal expansion programme, sometimes called “Sanaenomics,” pushed government spending to record levels. The FY2026 budget of 122.3 trillion yen is the largest in Japanese history, and her pledge to suspend the consumption tax on food raised concerns about fiscal discipline.

On the other side, the Bank of Japan continued to normalise monetary policy. Having raised rates to 0.75% in December 2025, the highest in 30 years, the BOJ signalled that further hikes were coming. Board member Takata dissented from the January hold decision, voting for an immediate increase to 1.0%. The combination of more government borrowing and tighter monetary policy was exactly the recipe for a bond market revolt.

A weak 20-year bond auction on 20 January, the worst since 1987 by some measures, catalysed the sell-off. Investor appetite for long-dated Japanese debt evaporated. Within days, yields on 30 and 40-year bonds jumped by more than 25 basis points, the most since the tariff shock of April 2025.

The Bessent connection

US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has been unusually direct about Japanese monetary policy. In his most explicit public comments, he told Bloomberg that the BOJ likely would be hiking rates because it had an “inflation problem” and could be “behind the curve.”

Officially, Japan’s government denied that Washington was pressuring the BOJ. Economic Revitalisation Minister Akazawa said Bessent “absolutely was not calling on the BOJ to raise rates.” But market participants read it differently. Former BOJ board member Kiuchi, now at Nomura Research Institute, noted that Bessent’s remarks “may reflect the Trump administration’s hope of using BOJ rate hikes to reverse the weak-yen trend.”

Bessent’s interest in the BOJ is not academic. His framework for the US economy, which targets 3% growth, a 3% budget deficit, and lower long-term borrowing costs, depends partly on stable demand for US Treasuries. If Japanese institutions begin selling Treasuries to reinvest at home, US long-term yields rise, mortgage rates stay elevated, and Bessent’s plan unravels.

This creates a delicate balancing act. Bessent appears to want the BOJ to hike rates gradually, enough to strengthen the yen and reduce the trade imbalance, but not so aggressively that it triggers a disorderly unwind of the carry trade and sends US yields spiralling higher. In the Treasury Department’s exchange-rate report to Congress in June, the message was explicit: the BOJ should keep tightening policy, which would support a “normalisation of the yen’s weakness.”

Why this matters for your portfolio

For US and European investors, the JGB crisis and Bessent’s response reveal an uncomfortable truth: Western bond markets are not self-contained. The era of ultra-low Japanese rates that provided a floor under global bond prices is ending. As the BOJ normalises and Japanese yields rise to competitive levels, the gravitational pull on global capital shifts.

If you hold a 60/40 portfolio, the bond allocation that is supposed to provide stability is now exposed to a new source of volatility: Japanese capital repatriation. If you have a mortgage, the rate you pay is influenced by whether Japanese life insurers continue to buy US agency debt. If you own Treasuries directly, you are competing for capital with a Japanese bond market that is offering yields not seen in a generation.

This does not mean a crisis is imminent. The January sell-off stabilised after the BOJ held rates and signalled caution. Finance Minister Katayama urged calm and said the market stress had receded. But the structural shift is real. Japan is no longer exporting cheap capital to the world. It is beginning to retain it.

The investment implication

For investors who are considering geographic diversification, the JGB story reinforces the case for Japanese equities from a different angle. If Japanese bond yields are rising and Japanese institutions are bringing capital home, that capital does not all go into JGBs. Some of it flows into Japanese equities, particularly in sectors that benefit from higher rates, such as banking and financial services.

Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group raised its net income outlook to a record 2.1 trillion yen. Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group hit multi-year stock price highs. The mega-banks are direct beneficiaries of the rate normalisation that is causing stress in the bond market.

There is also the currency dimension. If the structural forces favour yen appreciation, as the narrowing interest rate differential between Japan and the United States suggests, then foreign investors in Japanese equities benefit from both the equity return and the currency tailwind.

The January JGB crisis was not an isolated event. It was a signal that the financial architecture that has underpinned global bond markets for three decades is changing. Investors who understand that change, and position accordingly, may find themselves ahead of a shift that most of the market has not yet fully appreciated.

— Gyokuro · Disclaimer · Support