Could Reducing Bureaucracy Lead to a Major Leap for the German Economy? What the Administrative Reform Estimation of "250 Million Hours" Asks of Japan

Entering the same company name and address repeatedly. Being asked for a certificate already submitted by a different office. Spending more time gathering attachments than on the content of the application.

Even if each task is a small hassle, when accumulated across society, it results in a vast amount of time. What kind of economic effect could be achieved by reclaiming that time? A study reported in Germany provides material for considering administrative reform from the perspective of "how working time is used."

However, efficiency does not immediately benefit everyone. The study also includes the possibility of short-term job loss. What Japan should take note of is not just the large economic effect figures, but also the path to realizing those effects.

What happens if the procedural burden is reduced by 25%

According to an article distributed by dts news on September 29, 2026, by BUSINESS-PANORAMA, the study indicated that reducing Germany's bureaucratic and administrative burden by a quarter could free up 250 million hours of labor, potentially increasing the scale of real economic activity by 42 billion euros within five years.

The researchers involved are Klaus Michelsen and Simon Junker from the industry association of research-based pharmaceutical companies, and Ferdinand Fichtner from the Berlin University of Applied Sciences for Economics and Technology. The German economic newspaper Handelsblatt covered the study.

The reduction in burden here does not mean uniformly reducing the number of public servants by 25%. It is about reducing the effort companies and others spend on procedures and redirecting those working there to more productive tasks.

Moreover, the 42 billion euros is neither a reduction in government expenditure nor an increase in corporate profits. The report conveys the effect on the entire economy, and it is an estimate based on certain conditions, not an already realized outcome.

The brief explanation in the original article does not allow for confirmation of the aggregation period of the 250 million hours or the details of the model. It cannot be reinterpreted as "this much will definitely be saved every year" or "it applies to Japan in the same proportion."

The risk of job loss beyond efficiency

The transition process indicated by the study is not a simple success story.

As procedures decrease, the amount of work required within companies also decreases. If new tasks or demands do not immediately arise, there is a possibility of surplus personnel. According to the report, up to 23,000 people could lose their jobs in the first two years.

On the other hand, in the long term, price declines and increases in real income are expected to stimulate consumption and investment. Particularly significant growth is anticipated in personal consumption, with an expansion of 18 billion euros indicated. Michelsen mentions the possibility of a gradual economic boom starting after the end of 2030.

What is important here is the gap between "work disappearing" and "being able to demonstrate abilities in another job."

It is not guaranteed that someone responsible for document verification can move to sales, development, or caregiving work from the next day. The necessary skills, work location, and conditions differ. Only by designing plans to reduce time and support human transition together can the benefits of efficiency spread.

What Japan should consider is work that can be reduced before hiring

When applied to Japanese workplaces, this discussion becomes the question, "Is there work that can be reduced before increasing personnel?"

For example, consider a small company where the manager is overwhelmed with preparing application forms. If the confirmation and transcription of necessary documents are reduced, that time can be used for customer service, product improvement, and employee development. In workplaces that cannot have dedicated departments like large companies, even a few hours of reduction can change the way work is conducted.

However, this is a suggestion derived from the German study for Japan and is not a numerical prediction of the effect in Japan.

To measure success in Japan, it is not enough to count only the number of online procedures. It is necessary to look at the time applicants spend preparing, the number of times the same information is entered, the number of times applications are returned, travel to the counter, and the number of days waiting for processing results.

Even if an application screen is created, if attachments must be obtained from another office, printed, and scanned again for submission, the core burden remains.

From "turning paper into screens" to "submitting once is enough"

In Japan, mechanisms to address this issue are also being developed.

The Base Registry being developed by the Digital Agency is a database of basic information such as addresses and corporate names referenced by multiple systems. The agency aims to achieve "once-only" submission, where information submitted once does not need to be resubmitted.

The value of reform lies not in the new appearance of application forms but in the fact that users do not have to repeat the same things.

For example, is it necessary for applicants to enter information every time that the administration can appropriately reference? Is it necessary for individuals to carry certificates to confirm information held by another institution? Reconstructing procedures from such questions leads to actual burden reduction.

Of course, it is not enough to simply link information. It is necessary to clarify who views the information and for what purpose, and to prepare for error correction and misuse. Enhancing both usability and reliability is a condition for establishing reform.

Complaints seen on social media: "Why the same document again?"

The reaction on social media to this estimate itself was not sufficiently gathered within the range confirmed. Here, as related background, existing Reddit posts about German administrative procedures are introduced. This is not a direct reaction to the current report nor a survey representing the entire public opinion.

In the thread "German bureaucracy is no joke," a poster processing an EU Blue Card procedure complained about being asked again for documents already submitted multiple times. While it is a personal account and the administrative side's circumstances cannot be confirmed, dissatisfaction with duplicate submissions is clearly expressed.

Comments included opinions criticizing the large number of staff, while others argued that there are not enough people for the workload and that tasks should be reduced before reducing numbers.

Additionally, there were voices from users who usually complete procedures online and rarely visit government offices. Evaluations of administrative usability vary depending on the necessary procedures and the individual's position.

What can be read from this discussion is the difficulty of explaining the problem solely by the number of staff. Where do people who feel burdened stumble, and what do they repeat? The starting point for reform is to investigate those specific experiences.

Simply saying "eliminate red tape" won't progress

The original article also touches on another study addressing the difficulty of reform.

Sociologist Stefan Kühl examined bureaucratic criticism since the 1950s as six waves in a study for the Roman Herzog Institute. It is said that there were cases where significant effort was devoted to reform but progress was insufficient. He suggests refraining from uniformly vilifying bureaucracy.

Such a perspective is also useful in Japan.

Records and reviews have roles such as preventing fraud, maintaining fairness in treatment, and verifying the circumstances of accidents. Not all seemingly cumbersome procedures are unnecessary. On the other hand, it is necessary to inspect verification tasks that have continued to increase due to past circumstances and whose purposes have become ambiguous.

The question to ask is what that work is protecting and whether the same purpose can be achieved with less burden.

How to use the reclaimed time for whom

If Germany's estimates are to be applied to Japan's reforms, three perspectives are needed.

First, specify the targets for reduction. Identify processes that consume the time of users and staff, such as duplicate entries, re-obtaining certificates, and formal-only confirmations.

Second, ensure that the burden is not being shifted to someone else. Even if counter services are reduced, if applicants bear complex operations, it cannot be said that society as a whole has become more efficient.

Third, prepare how to use the freed time and human resources. Consider post-reduction work styles, including reassignment, training, and enhancing consultation support.

The number 250 million hours is large. However, whether that time generates value depends on what can be done after the procedures disappear.

What Japan should aim for is a system where applicants can return to their original work or life, and administrative staff can focus on necessary support. The success of document reduction reform is reflected in how the reclaimed time is used, rather than the number of pages reduced.

Source URL

1. BUSINESS-PANORAMA/dts news (September 29, 2026)
   Description of estimates on working hours, economic effects, short-term job loss, and Kühl's research.
   https://business-panorama.de/news.php?newsid=6713079

2. Digital Agency "Base Registry"
   Explanation of Japan's basic information maintenance and the "once-only" concept to eliminate the need for resubmitting the same information.
   https://www.digital.go.jp/policies/base_registry

3. Reddit "German bureaucracy is no joke"
   Reference to existing user posts and comments on German administrative procedures. Dissatisfaction with duplicate submissions, conflicting opinions on personnel, and varying evaluations of online procedures. Not a direct reaction to the current study.
   https://www.reddit.com/r/germany/comments/1rvby91/german_bureaucracy_is_no_joke/