Tokyo’s proposals to grant authorities expanded authority to revoke permanent residency status provoke accusations of xenophobia.
In Tokyo, Japan, permanent residency has traditionally offered a coveted sense of security for foreigners in a nation historically cautious towards mass immigration.
However, Tokyo’s recent proposals to revoke permanent residency (PR) status for individuals failing to meet tax and social insurance obligations are challenging this sense of security, causing concern among longstanding foreign residents.
Ben Shearon, a British expatriate residing in Japan for nearly 24 years, is among those questioning the reasoning behind the proposed alterations to immigration law.
As a permanent resident, Shearon retired in 2022 and now dedicates much of his time to managing his website, RetireJapan. Through this platform, he provides coaching and financial guidance to Japan’s expatriate community.
“I am not concerned about my own status in Japan. I have diligently fulfilled all my tax obligations, and I’ve consistently contributed to the national health insurance and public pension schemes since my arrival,” Shearon expressed.
“My primary concern at present is that the headlines seem to perpetuate a narrative suggesting that foreign residents, particularly permanent residents, are not fulfilling their fair tax responsibilities.”
Under the standard procedure for acquiring permanent residency, applicants must have resided in Japan for a minimum of 10 years and held a work visa for at least five of those years.
However, since 2017, foreign residents have had the option to expedite the process to as little as one year if they achieve high scores on a points-based evaluation. This assessment considers factors such as work experience, salary, educational background, age, and proficiency in the Japanese language.
Additionally, the law stipulates that a foreigner’s permanent residency must serve the best interests of Japan, which encompasses meeting tax obligations, contributing to pension schemes, and maintaining health insurance coverage.
Under the proposed changes, authorities would gain the ability to revoke residents’ visas due to non-payment of taxes and sentences of less than one year in prison.
Shearon, like many other foreign-born residents, expresses concern that the proposals target non-Japanese citizens for specific scrutiny.
“I’m also opposed to introducing new penalties that exclusively affect foreigners when there are already laws and consequences for tax evasion that apply to all residents of Japan equally,” he remarked.
“If non-payment of health insurance or pension contributions is a significant issue in Japan, then surely the appropriate approach is to enhance enforcement across the board, rather than singling out a small minority of foreigners.”
Currently, the number of permanent resident visa holders in Japan stands at approximately 880,000, constituting less than 1 percent of the population.
Since the announcement of the proposals last month, foreign residents have generally fallen into one of two camps in their reactions.
While some perceive Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s administration as fueling xenophobia, others dismiss the notion that foreigners are being targeted unfairly, asserting that tax evaders should face consequences and only those attempting to exploit the system have reason to be concerned.
“What are these foreigners even complaining about? If you’re already fulfilling your tax obligations, then congratulations. There’s nothing to fret over,” remarked Oliver Jia, a researcher and writer based in Kyoto, in response to criticism of the proposals as discriminatory.
“Do these individuals realize that permanent residency inherently entails fewer rights than citizenship? That’s the norm in virtually every country worldwide,” Jia added.
“Japan isn’t going to cater to your whims, especially if you’ve chosen not to meet your tax responsibilities. It’s nonsensical.”
Austin Smith, the public policy manager at GR Japan, a politically neutral government relations and advisory firm, acknowledged that the proposed amendment would diminish the permanence of residency status, albeit to a limited extent.
“Revoking permanent residency visas is likely to remain uncommon, but it may become more frequent compared to the current system,” Smith explained.
“Nevertheless, even a slight uptick in the possibility of losing permanent residency status is certain to cause concern among foreign residents, many of whom have established their lives in Japan.”
Smith speculated that the measures would likely target individuals who knowingly engaged in tax evasion or committed crimes resulting in imprisonment.
“However, there are apprehensions that this could impact those who are unable to pay taxes due to circumstances such as job loss or other factors,” Smith added. “Or that in the future, it could be expanded to encompass revocations for offenses resulting in fines.”
The decision comes in spite of Japan’s efforts to encourage more immigration in response to its rapid population decline.
In recent years, municipalities across Japan have streamlined the process for obtaining visas for startup owners and business managers, aiming to attract foreign talent and investment.
Later this month, Tokyo will introduce a new digital nomad visa, targeting remote workers from 49 countries who earn more than 10 million yen (approximately $67,000) annually.
Furthermore, Japan’s foreign trainee program, which has faced criticism for potentially exploiting cheap labor since its inception in 1993, is undergoing a comprehensive overhaul. The aim is to facilitate a smoother transition to skilled work visa status and, eventually, permanent residency.
In late February, the government also relaxed visa regulations to enable more foreign students to secure employment in Japan after completing their studies.
Official projections indicate that Japan’s population is expected to decline from around 125 million to fewer than 80 million by 2070.
Policymakers view increased immigration levels as a potential solution to replenish the workforce and prevent further stagnation in the country’s already modest economic growth rate.
Smith expressed sympathy for the necessity of increased immigration but doesn’t view the proposed alterations to permanent residency rules as inherently conflicting with Japan’s shift toward pro-immigration policies.
“It appears that the aim for lawmakers is to harmonize the conditions for revoking permanent residency visas with the criteria for obtaining permanent residency status,” he noted.
“However, I believe Japan must enhance the accessibility of immigration to mitigate some of the adverse effects stemming from an aging society. Japan should strive to make its labor market appealing to a diverse pool of prospective overseas workers and ensure that its immigration system is adaptable and inclusive.”
Image source: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/14/business/economy/japan-economy.html
