TOKYO -- Now that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has completed a full year in office, it is time to discuss the sense of uneasiness that has accompanied his Abenomics policy package.

Many business leaders welcomed the government's economy policy, which is designed to promote businesses and help them overcome the so-called six pains, such as a stronger yen and high corporate taxes.

But they have also said they do not want the government poking its nose into issues involving individual companies' management decisions.

Too helpful?

The Abe government has made some important achievements, such as steering the yen lower and stock prices higher, cutting corporate taxes and approving Japan's participation in negotiations for the Trans-Pacific Partnership free trade pact.

But the government's requests to businesses -- that they raise pay, promote more women to executive positions and delay the acceptance of job-seeking activities by students -- are disconcerting. Though the purpose may be right, allowing the government to pressure companies over such issues sets a dangerous precedent.

"Paternalism is a feature of Abenomics," said Takao Komine, professor at Hosei University, noting that the government has a strong tendency to lay out its ideal vision of the Japanese economy and then nudge companies and individuals in that direction.

A typical example is the law for reinforcing Japan's industrial competitiveness approved by the Diet during its latest session. Under the law, the government screens companies carrying out energy-saving investments or demonstration experiments of cutting-edge technology and in return grants them tax breaks and other regulatory advantages.

It also enables the government to determine which sectors need a shake-up due to oversupply and excess competition.

The law is similar to an industrial "targeting policy" designed to lead businesses to a certain direction to meet targets set by the government.

Although Abe said he will turn Japan into "the easiest country in the world for companies to do business in," the law shows his government would not hesitate to restrict corporate activities if it deemed such a move necessary. The sense of uneasiness about Abenomics stems from discrepancies such as this.

Chalmers Johnson, an American international political scientist familiar with Japan, once wrote, "The particular speed, form and consequences of Japanese economic growth are not intelligible without reference to the contributions of MITI (Ministry of International Trade and Industry)." MITI was the predecessor of the current Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry.

But there is no guarantee that the government is always better than companies or individuals at discerning which sectors are growing and which are declining. A considerable number of scholars, such as Professor Yoshiro Miwa of Osaka Gakuin University, dispute the effectiveness of the government's industrial policy.

Companies increasingly feel that they have to remain silent despite their misgiving about Abenomics, as they find it difficult to argue against Abe while he is backed by high support ratings. They are also unwilling to see pro-business policies rolled back.

A recovery for everyone

In its monthly economic report for December, the government dropped the word "deflation" for the first time in four years and two months. Undeniably, Abenomics has been highly effective in supporting Japan's economic recovery since the end of 2012 and leading the country out of its persistent deflation.

But a monthly labor survey by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare found that the index of seasonally adjusted real wages paid by businesses with five or more workers was 2.5% lower in October than its peak in March. Even though bonuses and overtime pay have increased, real wages have decreased due to a lack of increase in regular-hour pay and prices rises.

Japan experienced the longest postwar period of economic recovery between February 2002 and February 2008 as corporate earnings increased on the back of a weaker yen and an expansion of the world economy. Wages, however, failed to increase. The government is eager to avoid the recurrence of a recovery whose benefits fail to reach consumers.

One may well wonder if Abenomics will become even more paternalistic, with the government hastily passing the fruits of economic growth on from businesses to households in order to demonstrate its achievements.

Hopefully, the sense of uneasiness over Abenomics will not continue into its second year.