Shipping PCs With Yamato? Split Them Into Separate Parcels — Working Backward From the ¥300,000 Liability Cap

When you work in a fully remote organization, you ship PCs by courier constantly. Onboarding loaners, swaps for hardware failures, returns when someone leaves. Each time, you have to decide how to send the machine.

For these PC shipments in Japan I often use Yamato Transport. From that experience, I have landed on one small but meaningful rule: even when several machines would physically fit in a single box, it is better to split them into separate parcels. The key is the compensation ceiling, the carrier’s liability limit.

The PC delivery liability limit is “¥300,000 per parcel”

Yamato offers a service tailored to shipping precision equipment like PCs, called Pasokon Takkyubin (PC delivery). It protects the machine from impact with dedicated packing materials.

The detail that is easy to miss is the compensation condition. The official page states (translated from Japanese):

The liability limit is up to ¥300,000 per parcel (tax included).

The important phrase is “per parcel.” The compensation ceiling applies to each individual parcel, not to the shipment as a whole. In other words, if a parcel is lost or totaled in an accident, the most you get back is ¥300,000 for that one parcel.

This “per parcel” counting is not unique to Yamato. Sagawa Express, another major Japanese courier, sets the same liability limit of up to ¥300,000 per parcel for its Hikyaku Takuhaibin service. Japan Post’s Yu-Pack also covers up to ¥300,000 by default, and there you can raise the ceiling to ¥500,000 by adding the Security Service option. So the “split into separate parcels” idea that follows applies broadly, regardless of carrier.

Even when they fit in one box, split them

When sending multiple PCs, it is common that, purely by size and weight, you could stuff them all into a single box. Fewer parcels means a lower shipping fee and less paperwork on the waybill. On the surface it looks like the rational move.

But from a compensation standpoint, I do not recommend it. The reason lies in how the liability limit is counted.

Say you are shipping two PCs worth ¥200,000 each.

• Combined into one box: one parcel. The compensation ceiling on a total loss is ¥300,000. The contents are worth ¥400,000, so the ¥100,000 difference is not covered.
• Split into two parcels: two parcels. Each carries up to ¥300,000 of coverage, so the shipment is covered up to ¥600,000 in total.

The moment you combine them, your coverage shrinks to a single parcel’s worth. If the combined value of the contents exceeds ¥300,000, simply splitting them raises the ceiling in proportion to the parcel count.

Beyond compensation, splitting is also safer in terms of physical damage. Pack several machines into one box and, with the vibration of transit, the PCs can stack up and knock against each other, damaging one another. Precision equipment is best carried alone, wrapped in dedicated cushioning. Splitting into separate parcels follows that ideal cleanly.

I do not recommend air freight

For long-distance shipments, you might be tempted to use air freight to get the package there faster. For expensive PCs, though, I do not recommend it.

The reason, again, is compensation. Air transport sits under a different liability framework than ground transport in the carrier’s terms, and the coverage can fall short of the value of the cargo. Trading away compensation for speed leaves you exposed if something goes wrong, which is uncomfortable when you are entrusting expensive equipment. Unless it is genuinely urgent, sending split parcels by well-covered ground courier is, in the end, the most reassuring option.

The same goes for carrying a PC yourself and checking it as baggage on a flight. You can barely expect any compensation for damage.

• JAL: the compensation limit is ¥150,000, often well short of what an expensive PC is worth.
• ANA: it explicitly lists “precision equipment such as PCs” as an exclusion, so there is a high risk of it being outside coverage entirely.

With your own packing materials, regular delivery is fine

One last note on cost.

The PC delivery service bundles dedicated packing materials, and you pay for them. If you already have suitable packing materials on hand, or you kept the original box the PC shipped in, you do not have to use the PC delivery service. Sending it via regular Takkyubin (standard delivery) is perfectly fine.

Personally, I often feel it is wasteful to buy dedicated materials every time, so when I have the original box or some cushioning on hand, I frequently use regular delivery. Even then, the same principles apply: split into separate parcels, and avoid air freight. It all comes down to deciding your packing and shipping method by working backward from the compensation ceiling and the risk of damage.

Summary

• Yamato’s PC delivery liability limit is up to ¥300,000 per parcel (tax included).
• If the combined value of the contents exceeds ¥300,000, splitting into separate parcels instead of one box raises the ceiling in proportion to the parcel count.
• Cramming machines into one box also raises the risk of them stacking and damaging each other, so splitting is safer that way too.
• For expensive PCs, the coverage can fall short of the value, so I avoid air freight.
• If you have packing materials or the original box, regular delivery is plenty.

It is easy to judge PC shipping by price and convenience alone. But adding a single lens, how much you actually get back if something goes wrong, changes the optimal way to send it.

That’s all from the Gemba, where I occasionally ship PCs in a fully remote organization.