> Immigration authorities say the move is aimed at preventing cases in which foreign workers obtain visas under one category, but then engage in unrelated or lower-skilled work.
The claim appears to be that people were using up visa slots for things like interpreters or other jobs where clearly you'd need good language skills to actually do the job, including in Japanese, with the intent all along of doing some other job instead. An up-front test should let through almost all of the legitimate claimants of these visas, and stop almost all the fraudsters. Probably a lot cheaper than a similarly-effective level of after-the-fact auditing, or more-extensive checks into applicants' work situation.
[EDIT] I mean, in the framing provided by the government, the above appears to be what's going on. Governments may lie, of course.
Company founder in Japan here. This is largely how I read this specific news--its narrowly scoped to prevent patterns of abuse, which there have indeed been isolated cases tantamount to human trafficking.
That being said, there is a broader trend, that Japan's immigration authorities are becoming more foreigner-hostile, reflecting a broader political view shift in Japanese society (see: Sanseito political party) and one could argue in the US and globally.
One data point: a few months back we had one of our employees denied a Permanent Resident Visa due to a clerical error where our company forgot to notify the immigration bureau of an address change--we literally moved our office across the street, same city block. Our lawyer said such a case was unheard of a few years ago; these were always handled as simple corrections, instead the poor chap had to go to the back of the 9+ month waiting queue.
Our lawyer says the news is too new to know what concrete ramifications it will actually have on us, a tech company which uses English as the main language for engineering roles.
Relatively small clerical errors causing people to get permanent residency applications denied is becoming a trope. The ones I have heard:
- Client company address changed 4 years ago and the paperwork wasn't filed within 2 weeks.
- A late pension payment 2 years ago.
- Pension and health insurance were paid on time, but the date stamp on the physical payment slips was smudged and so "did not prove" that it was paid on time.
- City hall workers didn't send out health insurance slips in time, applicant (through no fault of their own) couldn't pay by the deadline.
This level of strictness is affecting people's lives, ability to make plans, get mortgages etc.
To add to this, permanent residency application times are now very long. After you complete your application some people are waiting nearly 2 years to get a response. There is a lot of vagueness about what happens if the rules change during your application period.
Unfortunately, tbis may be the simplest and most cost effective way to clear the backlog.
It's unfortunately for people who in good faith made honest mistakes or were victims of honest mistakes. But it also may be a low cost way to filter out bad faith applicants who were never planning to pay pensions/taxes fully. An assymeytry of information means we never see the balance of honest mistake vs dodgy excuse makers....
Alos, Japan tends to play the grey zone of rule interpretation as a buffer zone for signalling hard feedback. it is generally periodic and ends after a while.
Is it just me or is 1 year excessively short for qualifying for PR? I'm a bit unsurprised that it results in less leniency in applications, there are probably just too many applications because the thresholds have gone down (not saying salary education etc requirements are trivial, but a far cry from the old wait 10 years).
I hate to say this is a strange "win-win" in the end (politically speaking). It'll be a little harder for Japanese companies to take advantage of foreigners, often trafficking them to quite shady working and living conditions with very little pay. This has potential to protect some foreigners from that situation here. Additionally, this looks like a "win" for the anti-foreigner crowd, because "now it's tougher to get a visa here, haha!"
So it's good for foreigners, while also placating the anti-foreigner group.
I know many foreigners here that work in absolutely atrocious working conditions, getting kicked by bosses, seeing crushing death of their coworkers in the factory (and still expected to return to the same unsafe work the next day), tiny wages while living half-dozen people in tiny apartments. It really is sad, and the problem is the companies... not the foreigners.
Its not shocking, I see it implemented ie in Switzerland, where half of the world tries to get in. Since each part has their own language and none of that is english, its pretty important to exist in society for anything but brief visitors.
Its not restrictive as this (B2 is pretty high level in any language, here its weak B1) and resefved for 'higher' permits like C, for which you anyway need 10 years of residency in normal circumstances.
But japan is japan and one of most closed societies globally, nobody should be surprised by this.
Not exactly. I got (and renewed) the Swiss permit with zero knowledge of any official language. However, my wife had to present the basic certificate or my promise that she would learn the language.
Japan also tends to leave many contextual and obvious things unstated, and relies on group concensus and information exchange between in group peers over top down authority, so may consider the ultimate group concensus, language, not needing to be codified.
Although i do wonder what my son's 国語 text books teach if Japanese is not the official 国語.
Except the Swiss are total arseholes about it, they won't even grant citizenship to people born there or who've lived there for twenty years and speak the language. Many want to cap total population at 10 million, we'll see what happens in June.
And twelve years ago, the Swiss voted to restrict EU FoM for itself and the backlash was instant.
Can't blame the government, this is the Swiss voting public doing their best to be dickheads.
Japan is a bunch of islands, yes it's pretty closed, but Switzerland is a land-locked village with fewer people than London and entirely dependent on trade and the movement of people and money for all they have, and barely a scrap of a language to call its own. English is super common there, probably as a way of democratically inconveniencing everyone.
No country in Europe automatically grants citizenship just because you were born there. That’s a US thing. The closest are places like France where you can get it at 18 if you were born in France and meet a few more criteria.
And because Switzerland has mandatory military service, a lot of men born in Switzerland don’t _want_ to naturalize, especially those with EU passports.
Switzerland isn’t really that much different from other EU countries when it comes to citizenship, except for the 10 year requirement. That one is on the high side.
But for some reason it gets a lot of press as a particularly difficult country to naturalize in.
More accurately it's a New World thing. Almost all (30 out of 35) of the countries that have jus soli are North or South American. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli
It looks like they are proud of their country and want to keep it as is. They’ve seen what limitless immigration did to other countries and want none of it. Respect to them.
Switzerland has a fertility rate of about 1.4 and decreasing, unless they do something, there won't be much of a country left in a few generations. Solutions can involve immigration or natalism, but something has to change.
Or significantly increasing life-expectancy. Or new fertility technologies. A few generations is a long time.
The birth rates of the immigrant waves would presumably just plummet quickly anyway as they join the culture. Since that seems to have happened with all our other health problems.
I don’t know anything about Switzerland, but immigration isn’t a solution to the prospect of Japan “not having a country left in a few generations.” There might be more or fewer people living on the islands, but “Japan” will be gone either way.
Nowadays Japan’s fertility rate is higher than most of its neighbours. We are just used to pick it as an example because it started aging earlier than most other countries.
Japanese population is still over 120 million. Forecasts put it falling below 100 million at some point in the second half of this century.
Things will have to change in order to keep population stable in the long term, but the Japanese approach seems IMHO more sensible than that of other countries.
Your idea of “racism” arose in a western historical context and simply has no application to Japan. Japan didn’t bring a bunch of people to their country by force and then enslave them and deny them political rights for hundreds of years.
Nation-states not only exist, the UN recognizes their existence as a human right in the The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The UN recognizes a right of “peoples”—groups of people bound together by culture, ancestry, language, etc.—to self determination. I was born in a country named after one ethnocultural group (Thailand) and my family is from another country named after our ethnocultural group (Bangladesh). Japan is the homeland of Japanese people, just as Thailand is the homeland of Tai people, and Bangladesh is the homeland of Bengali people.
Not sure why you keep on repeating that when nationalism is a thoroughly modern concept and not something that God handed down to us thousands of years ago. It's frankly bizarre for a Bengali born in Thailand and living (presumably, based on timezone) in North America to be so invested in defending the honor of the Japanese ethnostate on the orange hacker website.
Also, I don't know what you would call the historical (and even current) treatment of Zainichi Koreans other than "racism" (as well as the current treatment of immigrants from places like Bengladesh).
> Not sure why you keep on repeating that when nationalism is a thoroughly modern concept
The desire for cultural groups to form their own communities isn’t modern, it’s ancient. What arose in the 20th century—in the aftermath of colonialism—is the global recognition that these groups have a right to form nation-states. The recognition that right was a driving force across the world in the 20th century: Pan-Arab nationalism, Indian nationalism, Bengali nationalism, etc.
> It's frankly bizarre for a Bengali born in Thailand … to be so invested in defending the honor of the Japanese ethnostate on the orange hacker website.
Because your criticism of Japan undermines the legitimacy of the existence of countries like Bangladesh as well. My uncle didn’t get shot at by Pakistanis to establish a multicultural economic zone.
> Also, I don't know what you would call the historical (and even current) treatment of Zainichi Koreans other than "racism" (as well as the current treatment of immigrants from places like Bangladesh)
If Japan allows immigrants into the country then mistreats them, then that’s wrong. But that’s not what this article or my post is talking about.
Idk why people who hate women can't resist telling on themselves like this. What makes you think this line of thinking is acceptable, or even rational?
The first paragraph in the GP comment makes a lot of sense. Just today I was listening to a program on NPR about birth control in Uganda - women were complaining about their husbands want more and more children. These women in Uganda were getting their contraceptives discreetly without their husbands knowledge.
When women are empowered they choose to have less kids.
(Another example of this is closer to home. Project 2025 wants to curtail contraceptives distribution and usage with the same goal: more kids. It is the same logic - diminish women’s power have re: pregnancy in order to increase birth rate)
A lot of people would rather live in their own aged society than a slightly younger foreign one.
Emphasis on slightly younger. Fertility is declining basically everywhere. Much of the developing world is now below replacement including India and China.
'A lot of people' usually means the predominately older strata of society. Japan has been having issues with the younger generation being locked out of employment and advancement because of older generations needing to hold onto their career with a death grip and retirement ages going up.
The aged society scam can only persist as long as they can exploit the younger generation. When that collapses, the end result is either going to be leaving the elderly to die or things start collapsing in new and interesting ways
The only reason why people 'prefer' this is for the same reason 'prefer' to believe climate change doesn't exist. Eventually reality catches up.
Immigration is not a long term solution to an aged society. The societies of target countries are aging as well and not far behind.
What you advocate is to bolster the work force of a country with a fertility rate of ~1 and falling, with people from a place with a fertility rate of ~2 and falling.
This is the correct reality. If there would be public vote in surrounding countries, ie mosques would be banned there too (btw those standing and having permit before the vote keep functioning).
But none of the german, french, italian etc politicians have the balls to let society decide for themselves, controversial topic or not. And people then wonder why in extremely left-leaning country like France there is high popularity for extreme right parties.
Maybe british with their one self-kneecaping brexit vote cured them, but public voting in general was never on the table.
Swiss are the most free nation globally. At least I havent hears of any on similar level. They vote responsibly, heck they have 3x the amount of immigrants per capita then next top country in Europe, but they want only people who can find work there, plus they host tons of refugees. And yes they dont want to lose their unique identity, they have enough examples around them to be wary and smart. I'd say they do their share and some more
I'm not saying you should ban mosques but when they do the whole call to prayer thing at 2am, I understand. Guessing you've never had to sleep any extended period of time near a mosque. If church bells rudely woke me up at 2am I'd understand the church banners too.
It's a numbers game as to why, not an argument being raped isn't worse. Relatively fewer people have been raped by a priest. Easily 100+x have been sent into a rage by the fucking call to prayer at 120 decibels. People tend to get more upset about things they have actually experienced.
>Switzerland is a land-locked village with fewer people than <one of the biggest cities in Europe> and entirely dependent on trade and the movement of people and money for all they have, and barely a scrap of a language to call its own.
Everything in that quote has been always been true though, and my guess is that they never allowed significant numbers of migrants at any time from about 800 (i.e., after the end of migration period) until whenever they started letting in large numbers of immigrants (some time after 1990 probably) (but not large enough numbers to suit you, I gather).
This is completely untrue, right after obtaining C permit, you can apply for citizenship since its also 10 year residency requirement. Language requirement is lowest in countries I know, written test is a joke, blindly I did it online and it was above 90% without preparing at all, threshold is around 70% IIRC. Rarely there is committee after that, most people around got it after passing test.
Of course if you have active criminal record no point doing that. If you keep going away for 6+ months often it gets reset. If you have obviously lied on your tax return thats an issue too.
I know this intimately since right now going through this proces. One american colleague is doing the same. Right now, its much easier than ie in France.
Who cares about citizenship? I know Japanese expats. They don't speak Dutch and they keep their Japanese passport. They just get a permanent residence and everyone is happy.
We all know that there are two groups of foreigners: people from first world countries and the rest.
Ofcourse the Netherlands constitution says that you have to treat everyone equally but that's just hippie talk.
Don't muslim citizens and foreign residents in Switzerland enjoy more rights than in pretty much any Muslim country?
There is definitely some hostility to some aspects of Islam, aspects which seem to only recently have become central to the exercise of worship for some (the veiling of women for instance), yet this has not translated to some outright discrimination of muslims. Bosnian and Albanian immigrants for instance appear to have been integrated and/or assimilated into society.
> Except the Swiss are total arseholes about it, they won't even grant citizenship to people born there or who've lived there for twenty years and speak the language.
Japan has those issues as well, look up Zainichi Koreans
These days Zainichi Koreans are granted citizenship pretty much automatically if they request it. But some choose not to, mostly because they prefer to retain Korean citizenship instead (Japan does not allow dual citizenship).
Yes, previously they were forced to choose Japanese names to naturalize, but this has not been the case for a long time.
I don't believe there are residency requirements to ownership so the people doing that do not need to go through this flow at all. Just an entirely separate issue, though it might be tackled.
I do have the impression Tokyo is getting similar dynamics to the rest of the world on this front: builders don't care where the money is coming from and so if money from outside the country can get buildings built they're happy.
A friend of mine moved into a sold-out Yokohama tower mansion recently... and despite the bike and car parking being fully booked even more than 6 months in it was _quite_ empty. I have a feeling a lot of people are buying into the market expecting to get easy rental money and not really seeing it.
I don't know how verifiable it is, but the general narrative has been a lot is Chinese parking their money outside the reach of the CCP. I've never quite understood the mechanics of this though.
Unlike banks, many services, some Rakuten subpages, etc requiring full width, I have found real estate sites (purchase, not rent) to be the most likely to accept half-width roman characters for the name input box.
As someone who has been living in Japan for years now, and still has a long way to go learning the language, I generally support language proficiency requirements. First, it should be noted that these are fairly common sense requirements designed to reduce fraud - requiring people applying for work visas that require Japanese proficiency to actually be able to speak Japanese. I suspect there will be more requirements in the future for things like permanent residency, but will wait for those to actually be implemented before commenting one way or another.
And second - it’s really hard to participate in society if you can’t speak the language. I think this creates resentment for both Japanese citizens and foreign residents alike.
I regret not studying sooner and harder, and a clear language requirement probably would have influenced me to try harder.
I did two years in Lausanne without speaking French and 9 years in Beijing with…maybe 2nd year proficiency in Chinese (better than most foreigners, but hardly fluent!). You can totally live in society without fluency, Switzerland being harder only because I never studied French before.
If you are doing work with a world market, you are kind of expected to speak the language of that work and not necessarily the country you are in.
Sounds like freetime2 is taking personal responsibility for his deficiencies which is a pretty japanese way of thinking. YMMV in the rest of the world.
> And second - it’s really hard to participate in society if you can’t speak the language. I think this creates resentment for both Japanese citizens and foreign residents alike.
I basically agree, but there are two problems with this:
1) the JLPT is a test of fairly academic reading and listening (for those unfamiliar, it’s basically the equivalent of the US SAT reading/vocab section in terms of difficulty). There’s no speaking or communication requirement. I probably cannot pass N2, despite being conversant and functional in everyday life at a high B1 level.
2) The populations who are most likely to abuse the current system are fairly notorious for being able to pass the exam without real communication ability. I know a fair number of people who were able to pass without being able to have even a basic conversation at the time.
Language schools here are essentially factories designed to shove kanji readers through the JLPT in minimum time, with little attention paid to conversation. Overall,
this feels like a sledgehammer approach to a screwdriver problem.
Not sure why your comment is downvoted, because it hits the issue dead center, namely it's completely possible to pass either of the required tests (N2/J2) and not being able to speak a single word of Japanese in a live conversation.
That's why at least one category of applicants abusing the visa (Chinese) will continue to do so without any issues.
There are a lot of folks who do not want to hear anything truthful if it violates their sense of national justice.
I don't have a dog in the fight. I just think the current "solution" is blunt, and will end up damaging both the Japanese economy, and a bunch of people who were never "the problem", per se.
Japan is importing record numbers of workers. Most convenience stores and supermarkets in my town (far from Tokyo) are staffed by 'language school students' (an you can work 28 hours a week on a student visa). Agreements [1] between Japan and other countries to bring more workers are making headlines. At the same time, it's getting harder and harder to stay.
Permanent residency applications are being judged incredibly strictly. Citizenship applications need 10 years of continuous residence up from 5. Business manager visas have gone from needing 5m yen of capital to 30m yen.
It seems pretty clear that the goal is to get workers in for some productive years but make the path for staying difficult. I guess that's one way to solve an aging population problem.
To put things in perspective, Japan is an island and has entry and exit controls on the borders, so it is estimated that 0.05% of the population is illegal immigrants (people not leaving when their visa runs out). And the police can and do stop visible minorities to confirm their residence status on the spot. It is compulsory to carry identification documents if you are a foreigner. (There are questions about the legality of this but it is common and widely practiced).
It should be noted that JLPT is not a direct equivalent to CEFR. CEFR requires you to pass speaking and writing, JLPT does not demand you to be able to write, or speak, at all. IT only tests listening and reading. This ironically means that while yeah, you will be able to read a LOT of kanji with JLPT N2, you might not be anywhere near B2 level at speaking and conversation, and probably not at all when it comes to writing (writing Kanji is a whole other thing beyond being able to read, it requires dedicated practice, but anyways a lot of people now don't need to since you can type it out on your phone or computer, and just copy that onto the form or whatever you are writing on)
Speaking as someone who reads around N2 level but can barely ask for directions, this is on the mark. I self-study and have few means or reasons to practice speaking, so it's never been a priority for me.
But I think this arrangement is actually quite...realistic? Charitable? It's very hard to become conversationally fluent in a language - especially one as foreign for most learners as Japanese is - without the kind of serious immersion you can most easily get just by living in the country (though maybe I'm just making excuses for myself). Asking learners to do the groundwork and get the foundations at home before getting hit with that immersion is going to set them up for success, facilitate their smooth integration, and demonstrates a candidate's seriousness. My impression is that in such a situation most learners will improve their speaking skills quickly, but there's no getting around months and years of drilling kanji.
There's probably not much value in JLPT adding a writing component, however, I do believe that the lack of a speaking component is really disappointing. Being able to consume a language is one thing, being able to produce in it, is another, and vital for someone who will be working and living there.
I think every country should do this. What I am seeing these days is that people who deserve visas are struggling with visa issues, while untalented people are getting visas easily
I agree too. And before the pearl clutching starts, I’m very much practicing what I preach as an American seriously considering retiring to a Spanish speaking country and who just came back from the target country after spending six weeks there - and planning on returning once or twice a year.
I’m learning Spanish and find it disheartening that many of the ex-pats [1] I hung out with don’t even attempt to learn Spanish. I’m currently somewhere around an A2/low B1.
[1] yes I also am against people calling themselves “ex-pats” instead of “immigrants”
It depends on the work you are going to be doing. For example, if you are going to do research, then it is more important that you speak and write fluently in English, than whatever language is spoken in the country you'll be working in.
Though being fluent in the local language will, of course, make your life a lot easier
The key thing is that the ESI category includes a lot of work which you don't need to know Japanese. For example, software engineering jobs in Japan are often at either larger multinational companies or companies with enough presence outside of Japan that they have teams which are in English.
Japan has been on a recent anti-immigration kick via making visas harder and more expensive to get while also blaming them for all of their problems which, isn't really gonna work out for multiple reasons.
> software engineering jobs in Japan are often at either larger multinational companies or companies with enough presence outside of Japan that they have teams which are in English.
Just because you work in a multinational company where they have English speaking teams does not mean that you should not know the language. It is weird to assume that just because your first job is with an English speaking team you will always work with those teams or in that company at all.
What about daily life? Communication is a fundamental part of your activity as a civilian imo. Not understanding what is going on in a country without using some device to translate for you is not acceptable. Whether in a train or during an earthquake you must always be able to communicate.
This is true that it primarily applies to jobs which say they need to know Japanese as an attempt to prevent fraud, but realistically it doesn't actually accomplish anything beyond punishing honest businesses. Companies will just lie about the language requirements, and visa holders will have no incentive to properly report the fraud because they run the risk of their visa being revoked and kicked out of the country.
There are smarter ways to implement a language requirement, and really this is part of a trend of Japan tightening up restrictions on foreigners to try and solve a perceived problem by a fraction of a fraction of individuals.
Teaching English is humanities though, not IS, so that doesn't work. (To clarify, teaching at any sort of private company. A K12 school has a dedicated Instructor class that can't be used for anything else.) And translating (which requires proficiency) is IS in some cases I think?
I also initially read it as "this is an example of the type of category that would have the requirement". Which doesn't preclude other categories also needing the requirement.
Unless the places of work are vetted, setting up a company to offer a job, and collect fees for offering said "jobs", would seem to be a simple way of committing fraud in that case.
So either you vet the companies offering those jobs, or you vet the visa applicants.
The first doesn't explain anything - the government was responsible before this new policy, so having no such policy doesn't go agasint that fact.
Also other alternatives exist
To prevent fraud. It's the same reason governments have driving tests and tax or grant audits. If the government deferred to applicants for everything, there'd be no point in the application process.
Sure, there's a libertarian argument against limiting visas, imposing taxes, and issuing grants, but if you are going to, it requires some amount of enforcement to prevent rampant fraud.
ironically the first people who would disagree with you are the people who passed this piece of legislation
slightly more seriously though work is one place where language acquisition happens organically, work is where culture emerges and despite the grievances I have with Anglosphere one great aspect of it is that they are never so frail to think that language can or must be imposed by a commissioner.
One of the first things the Anglosphere did was enforce language customs. I think you should review a bit of the history here. Why do you think the standard language for flight is English? To the extent that language acquisition happens at the office, it comes at the expense of actually getting work done.
>If I'm applying for a work visa where the work I'm doing would require me to know Japanese, I should know Japanese.
the naturalization act of 1906 and the immigration act of 1917 , in the US, were some of the hardest fought-for and controversial laws ever put in place.
The immigration act got vetod by 3 different sitting presidents in different forms , and the naturalization act included a 'free white persons & natives' clause that screwed over a lot of people.
It was pretty widely seen as a method to minimize poor working people. Both laws were used a ton during the commie red scare against citizens, and the 1917 law is essentially held responsible for the separation of families / 'port of entry tragedies' that separated families based on things like language.
now : i'm not saying that Japan is walking in the same foot-steps, just pointing out that language/culture exclusivity within legal spheres usually ends poorly for the people.
Without knowing the numbers, I'd wager that the majority of work Visas worldwide are "dual-intent", to use the USCIS parlance. Restrictions might be higher or lower in different countries, but there's generaly a path dor moving from a work visa to permanent residency.
I think we need to acknowledge that all but the most transitory fruit pickers may want to settle permanently after working in a country for many years, and should not unreasonably be prevented from doing so.
If i were working in a country for many years, I would make some effort to learn to communicate with the other people who live in that country, before becoming a permanent resident. I understand this is very difficult; I've been studying Spanish every day for almost 2 years and I am nowhere near fluent. However, I suspect I would be further along if I lived somewhere where people commonly spoke Spanish.
There is nothing unreasonable about if you want to live in a country you should learn the language. I said in another comment that I’m learning Spanish now because I plan to move to a Spanish speaking country for retirement.
Went there in 2012 and then again last year. It's wild how quickly it's changed. IMO, Japan is a very special place and it's sad to see that it's having the same problems as the rest of the first world.
So, on one hand, this is an excusable policy (as in, there are already immigration law apologists in here making excuses for it).
On the other hand, I don't like immigration control as a concept - countries should not operate like hereditary country clubs, and people should not have less freedom of movement than bags of money. More self-interestedly, I'm an American, and I know my country's infrastructure - both political and otherwise - is failing horribly. I don't want out yet, but I know I'm going to need out at some point in my lifetime. So every time I see a favorable country locking their doors, I shudder.
There's probably going to be at least one reply from a European saying this is a good thing - that American citizens (or, if things get really bad, American refugees) should be denied entry, under the theory that immigration is a welfare / free money for thieves program and that letting people leave destroyed countries just rewards people for destroying them.
This is, of course, bullshit, both because it's victim blame-y, AND because it covers up a shortcoming of the country making the excuse. The real reason countries try to avoid taking in refugees is that most countries are built like hereditary country clubs. They don't take in immigrants, so they don't know how to integrate immigrants. Japan in particular has a community of poorly-integrated American emigrants that largely just stick to themselves.
America, ironically enough, is one of the few countries that actually cracked the code on immigration. We used to have really generous family reunion visa programs, we have basically every immigrant population you can think of in every major city, and immigrants that come here integrate way better than ones that go to Europe. So it's not like countries have to be restrictive on immigration.
Instead, what I'm seeing is that immigration is being used by politicians to distract from their own countries' failings. It's the same story as what happened in America[1]: when shit breaks, people get rich off selling the fix, and so they pay[0] politicians to keep the system broken enough that they can continue profiting off of it. But this only works if you give the people some kind of excuse. The politics of scarcity are brutal, but scarcity becomes a far easier sell if you have a scapegoat. Some magical source of systemic burden you can shed without backlash. "The state-run insurance system isn't broken because we don't pay our doctors, it's broken because we have too many poor patients from other countries!"
[0] Not necessarily in the "bribery is free speech" way America does it, of course.
[1] Which would indicate to me that perhaps leaving the country is a fool's errand, if every other country is on the same curve.
Key detail:
> Immigration authorities say the move is aimed at preventing cases in which foreign workers obtain visas under one category, but then engage in unrelated or lower-skilled work.
The claim appears to be that people were using up visa slots for things like interpreters or other jobs where clearly you'd need good language skills to actually do the job, including in Japanese, with the intent all along of doing some other job instead. An up-front test should let through almost all of the legitimate claimants of these visas, and stop almost all the fraudsters. Probably a lot cheaper than a similarly-effective level of after-the-fact auditing, or more-extensive checks into applicants' work situation.
[EDIT] I mean, in the framing provided by the government, the above appears to be what's going on. Governments may lie, of course.
Company founder in Japan here. This is largely how I read this specific news--its narrowly scoped to prevent patterns of abuse, which there have indeed been isolated cases tantamount to human trafficking.
That being said, there is a broader trend, that Japan's immigration authorities are becoming more foreigner-hostile, reflecting a broader political view shift in Japanese society (see: Sanseito political party) and one could argue in the US and globally.
One data point: a few months back we had one of our employees denied a Permanent Resident Visa due to a clerical error where our company forgot to notify the immigration bureau of an address change--we literally moved our office across the street, same city block. Our lawyer said such a case was unheard of a few years ago; these were always handled as simple corrections, instead the poor chap had to go to the back of the 9+ month waiting queue.
Our lawyer says the news is too new to know what concrete ramifications it will actually have on us, a tech company which uses English as the main language for engineering roles.
Relatively small clerical errors causing people to get permanent residency applications denied is becoming a trope. The ones I have heard:
- Client company address changed 4 years ago and the paperwork wasn't filed within 2 weeks.
- A late pension payment 2 years ago.
- Pension and health insurance were paid on time, but the date stamp on the physical payment slips was smudged and so "did not prove" that it was paid on time.
- City hall workers didn't send out health insurance slips in time, applicant (through no fault of their own) couldn't pay by the deadline.
This level of strictness is affecting people's lives, ability to make plans, get mortgages etc.
To add to this, permanent residency application times are now very long. After you complete your application some people are waiting nearly 2 years to get a response. There is a lot of vagueness about what happens if the rules change during your application period.
Unfortunately, tbis may be the simplest and most cost effective way to clear the backlog. It's unfortunately for people who in good faith made honest mistakes or were victims of honest mistakes. But it also may be a low cost way to filter out bad faith applicants who were never planning to pay pensions/taxes fully. An assymeytry of information means we never see the balance of honest mistake vs dodgy excuse makers.... Alos, Japan tends to play the grey zone of rule interpretation as a buffer zone for signalling hard feedback. it is generally periodic and ends after a while.
Is it just me or is 1 year excessively short for qualifying for PR? I'm a bit unsurprised that it results in less leniency in applications, there are probably just too many applications because the thresholds have gone down (not saying salary education etc requirements are trivial, but a far cry from the old wait 10 years).
I hate to say this is a strange "win-win" in the end (politically speaking). It'll be a little harder for Japanese companies to take advantage of foreigners, often trafficking them to quite shady working and living conditions with very little pay. This has potential to protect some foreigners from that situation here. Additionally, this looks like a "win" for the anti-foreigner crowd, because "now it's tougher to get a visa here, haha!"
So it's good for foreigners, while also placating the anti-foreigner group.
I know many foreigners here that work in absolutely atrocious working conditions, getting kicked by bosses, seeing crushing death of their coworkers in the factory (and still expected to return to the same unsafe work the next day), tiny wages while living half-dozen people in tiny apartments. It really is sad, and the problem is the companies... not the foreigners.
Seems like the guys covering his ass. Ive had visas denied in japan over small errors. I dont use visa lawyers anymore and no longer have this issue.
Might ofc also be that the immigration officers got tired of working till 10pm every day
Are you Japanese? What was your motivation behind founding in Japan?
Its not shocking, I see it implemented ie in Switzerland, where half of the world tries to get in. Since each part has their own language and none of that is english, its pretty important to exist in society for anything but brief visitors.
Its not restrictive as this (B2 is pretty high level in any language, here its weak B1) and resefved for 'higher' permits like C, for which you anyway need 10 years of residency in normal circumstances.
But japan is japan and one of most closed societies globally, nobody should be surprised by this.
Not exactly. I got (and renewed) the Swiss permit with zero knowledge of any official language. However, my wife had to present the basic certificate or my promise that she would learn the language.
Japan, ~like the US~, has no official language.
(edit: ~strike~)
Japan also tends to leave many contextual and obvious things unstated, and relies on group concensus and information exchange between in group peers over top down authority, so may consider the ultimate group concensus, language, not needing to be codified.
Although i do wonder what my son's 国語 text books teach if Japanese is not the official 国語.
> Japan, like the US, has no official language.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/03/desi...
POTUS doesn't have the power to set an official language.
It's not the Department of War, either. Still says that everywhere.
Legal documents, contracts, and court filings must continue to use Department of Defense because legally the Department of War doesn't exist.
Talk is cheap.
the US Dept of War is doing far more than just talk tho.
see also: half of the middle east on fire.
Actually they are following through, check the news
Why not? Maybe they do?
Except the Swiss are total arseholes about it, they won't even grant citizenship to people born there or who've lived there for twenty years and speak the language. Many want to cap total population at 10 million, we'll see what happens in June.
And twelve years ago, the Swiss voted to restrict EU FoM for itself and the backlash was instant.
Can't blame the government, this is the Swiss voting public doing their best to be dickheads.
Japan is a bunch of islands, yes it's pretty closed, but Switzerland is a land-locked village with fewer people than London and entirely dependent on trade and the movement of people and money for all they have, and barely a scrap of a language to call its own. English is super common there, probably as a way of democratically inconveniencing everyone.
No country in Europe automatically grants citizenship just because you were born there. That’s a US thing. The closest are places like France where you can get it at 18 if you were born in France and meet a few more criteria.
And because Switzerland has mandatory military service, a lot of men born in Switzerland don’t _want_ to naturalize, especially those with EU passports.
Switzerland isn’t really that much different from other EU countries when it comes to citizenship, except for the 10 year requirement. That one is on the high side.
But for some reason it gets a lot of press as a particularly difficult country to naturalize in.
> [Jus soli]'s a US thing
More accurately it's a New World thing. Almost all (30 out of 35) of the countries that have jus soli are North or South American. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli
It looks like they are proud of their country and want to keep it as is. They’ve seen what limitless immigration did to other countries and want none of it. Respect to them.
Switzerland has a fertility rate of about 1.4 and decreasing, unless they do something, there won't be much of a country left in a few generations. Solutions can involve immigration or natalism, but something has to change.
Japan is worse.
Or significantly increasing life-expectancy. Or new fertility technologies. A few generations is a long time.
The birth rates of the immigrant waves would presumably just plummet quickly anyway as they join the culture. Since that seems to have happened with all our other health problems.
I don’t know anything about Switzerland, but immigration isn’t a solution to the prospect of Japan “not having a country left in a few generations.” There might be more or fewer people living on the islands, but “Japan” will be gone either way.
Nowadays Japan’s fertility rate is higher than most of its neighbours. We are just used to pick it as an example because it started aging earlier than most other countries.
Japanese population is still over 120 million. Forecasts put it falling below 100 million at some point in the second half of this century.
Things will have to change in order to keep population stable in the long term, but the Japanese approach seems IMHO more sensible than that of other countries.
Cohesive democratic societies are fragile.
I can’t parse this statement. I’m not sure if this about culture changes or about climate threat.
[flagged]
Your idea of “racism” arose in a western historical context and simply has no application to Japan. Japan didn’t bring a bunch of people to their country by force and then enslave them and deny them political rights for hundreds of years.
Nation-states not only exist, the UN recognizes their existence as a human right in the The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The UN recognizes a right of “peoples”—groups of people bound together by culture, ancestry, language, etc.—to self determination. I was born in a country named after one ethnocultural group (Thailand) and my family is from another country named after our ethnocultural group (Bangladesh). Japan is the homeland of Japanese people, just as Thailand is the homeland of Tai people, and Bangladesh is the homeland of Bengali people.
Non-Japanese people don't be weird about Japan challenge (difficulty: impossible)
“Don’t think the whole world is America challenge” (difficulty: impossible)
Not sure why you keep on repeating that when nationalism is a thoroughly modern concept and not something that God handed down to us thousands of years ago. It's frankly bizarre for a Bengali born in Thailand and living (presumably, based on timezone) in North America to be so invested in defending the honor of the Japanese ethnostate on the orange hacker website.
Also, I don't know what you would call the historical (and even current) treatment of Zainichi Koreans other than "racism" (as well as the current treatment of immigrants from places like Bengladesh).
> Not sure why you keep on repeating that when nationalism is a thoroughly modern concept
The desire for cultural groups to form their own communities isn’t modern, it’s ancient. What arose in the 20th century—in the aftermath of colonialism—is the global recognition that these groups have a right to form nation-states. The recognition that right was a driving force across the world in the 20th century: Pan-Arab nationalism, Indian nationalism, Bengali nationalism, etc.
> It's frankly bizarre for a Bengali born in Thailand … to be so invested in defending the honor of the Japanese ethnostate on the orange hacker website.
Because your criticism of Japan undermines the legitimacy of the existence of countries like Bangladesh as well. My uncle didn’t get shot at by Pakistanis to establish a multicultural economic zone.
> Also, I don't know what you would call the historical (and even current) treatment of Zainichi Koreans other than "racism" (as well as the current treatment of immigrants from places like Bangladesh)
If Japan allows immigrants into the country then mistreats them, then that’s wrong. But that’s not what this article or my post is talking about.
[flagged]
How do you define "Japan"?
The nation state located on the islands of Japan populated with almost exclusively Japanese people.
Good news then: it's still going to be there in a hundred years!
It won't be if they start importing immigrants by the tens of millions.
they're islands mon ami, it's not hard to define them -- the borders are fairly straightforward
you can piddle around about a few tiny islands elsewhere, e.g. okinawa, but the main islands are undisputedly "japan"
Sounds like it will still exist then, barring climate catastrophe.
The standard way. The same way you define “Thailand” or “Bangladesh” or “Vietnam?”
It seems like "Japan" will very much still exist in either of your scenarios then.
The solution to a low fertility rate is to… destroy the country? What’s the difference?
[flagged]
This is the most divorced-man comment I've ever read.
And the most correct.
Idk why people who hate women can't resist telling on themselves like this. What makes you think this line of thinking is acceptable, or even rational?
The first paragraph in the GP comment makes a lot of sense. Just today I was listening to a program on NPR about birth control in Uganda - women were complaining about their husbands want more and more children. These women in Uganda were getting their contraceptives discreetly without their husbands knowledge.
When women are empowered they choose to have less kids.
(Another example of this is closer to home. Project 2025 wants to curtail contraceptives distribution and usage with the same goal: more kids. It is the same logic - diminish women’s power have re: pregnancy in order to increase birth rate)
A lot of people would rather live in their own aged society than a slightly younger foreign one.
Emphasis on slightly younger. Fertility is declining basically everywhere. Much of the developing world is now below replacement including India and China.
'A lot of people' usually means the predominately older strata of society. Japan has been having issues with the younger generation being locked out of employment and advancement because of older generations needing to hold onto their career with a death grip and retirement ages going up.
The aged society scam can only persist as long as they can exploit the younger generation. When that collapses, the end result is either going to be leaving the elderly to die or things start collapsing in new and interesting ways
The only reason why people 'prefer' this is for the same reason 'prefer' to believe climate change doesn't exist. Eventually reality catches up.
You've completely missed my point.
Immigration is not a long term solution to an aged society. The societies of target countries are aging as well and not far behind.
What you advocate is to bolster the work force of a country with a fertility rate of ~1 and falling, with people from a place with a fertility rate of ~2 and falling.
Africa has fertility rate 4.02 in 2025. Do you want Switzerland look like Africa?
There are numbers in between 1.4 and 4.02. There's no reason Switzerland would need to swing to the complete opposite end.
Africas fertility rate is declining massively as well.
Yes, by 2091 Africas fertility rate should be 2.1
This is the correct reality. If there would be public vote in surrounding countries, ie mosques would be banned there too (btw those standing and having permit before the vote keep functioning).
But none of the german, french, italian etc politicians have the balls to let society decide for themselves, controversial topic or not. And people then wonder why in extremely left-leaning country like France there is high popularity for extreme right parties.
Maybe british with their one self-kneecaping brexit vote cured them, but public voting in general was never on the table.
Swiss are the most free nation globally. At least I havent hears of any on similar level. They vote responsibly, heck they have 3x the amount of immigrants per capita then next top country in Europe, but they want only people who can find work there, plus they host tons of refugees. And yes they dont want to lose their unique identity, they have enough examples around them to be wary and smart. I'd say they do their share and some more
[flagged]
I'm not saying you should ban mosques but when they do the whole call to prayer thing at 2am, I understand. Guessing you've never had to sleep any extended period of time near a mosque. If church bells rudely woke me up at 2am I'd understand the church banners too.
Well maybe molesting children and covering it up should be more of a reason to ban churches.
But I agree that should come under noise ordinances. I don’t care who someone chooses to worship as long as it doesn’t interfere with me.
It's a numbers game as to why, not an argument being raped isn't worse. Relatively fewer people have been raped by a priest. Easily 100+x have been sent into a rage by the fucking call to prayer at 120 decibels. People tend to get more upset about things they have actually experienced.
This discourse feels like you are deliberately pretending not to understand things.
[flagged]
Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive.
Please don't fulminate...
Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents. Omit internet tropes.
Please don't use Hacker News for political or ideological battle. It tramples curiosity.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
>Switzerland is a land-locked village with fewer people than <one of the biggest cities in Europe> and entirely dependent on trade and the movement of people and money for all they have, and barely a scrap of a language to call its own.
Everything in that quote has been always been true though, and my guess is that they never allowed significant numbers of migrants at any time from about 800 (i.e., after the end of migration period) until whenever they started letting in large numbers of immigrants (some time after 1990 probably) (but not large enough numbers to suit you, I gather).
> lived there for twenty years and speak the language
Which one?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Switzerland
This is completely untrue, right after obtaining C permit, you can apply for citizenship since its also 10 year residency requirement. Language requirement is lowest in countries I know, written test is a joke, blindly I did it online and it was above 90% without preparing at all, threshold is around 70% IIRC. Rarely there is committee after that, most people around got it after passing test.
Of course if you have active criminal record no point doing that. If you keep going away for 6+ months often it gets reset. If you have obviously lied on your tax return thats an issue too.
I know this intimately since right now going through this proces. One american colleague is doing the same. Right now, its much easier than ie in France.
Who cares about citizenship? I know Japanese expats. They don't speak Dutch and they keep their Japanese passport. They just get a permanent residence and everyone is happy.
We all know that there are two groups of foreigners: people from first world countries and the rest.
Ofcourse the Netherlands constitution says that you have to treat everyone equally but that's just hippie talk.
Are you sure about the Dutch part? AFAIK in almost all EU countries you have to have at least B1 language for permanent residency.
Such dickheads the Swiss voting public, how dare they exercise a direct democracy?! So inconveniencing!
Yeah, do they think they have a country or something? Don’t they know they’re just an economic zone between France, Italy, and Germany.
[flagged]
Don't muslim citizens and foreign residents in Switzerland enjoy more rights than in pretty much any Muslim country?
There is definitely some hostility to some aspects of Islam, aspects which seem to only recently have become central to the exercise of worship for some (the veiling of women for instance), yet this has not translated to some outright discrimination of muslims. Bosnian and Albanian immigrants for instance appear to have been integrated and/or assimilated into society.
> Don't muslim citizens and foreign residents in Switzerland enjoy more rights than in pretty much any Muslim country?
That’s a great observation, and probably true in the case of every single liberal western democracy. Especially if you’re a woman, gay, etc.
> Except the Swiss are total arseholes about it, they won't even grant citizenship to people born there or who've lived there for twenty years and speak the language.
Japan has those issues as well, look up Zainichi Koreans
These days Zainichi Koreans are granted citizenship pretty much automatically if they request it. But some choose not to, mostly because they prefer to retain Korean citizenship instead (Japan does not allow dual citizenship).
Yes, previously they were forced to choose Japanese names to naturalize, but this has not been the case for a long time.
There's also the issue of people going to Japan to buy out several properties to then rent them out.
I don't believe there are residency requirements to ownership so the people doing that do not need to go through this flow at all. Just an entirely separate issue, though it might be tackled.
I do have the impression Tokyo is getting similar dynamics to the rest of the world on this front: builders don't care where the money is coming from and so if money from outside the country can get buildings built they're happy.
A friend of mine moved into a sold-out Yokohama tower mansion recently... and despite the bike and car parking being fully booked even more than 6 months in it was _quite_ empty. I have a feeling a lot of people are buying into the market expecting to get easy rental money and not really seeing it.
But if it's empty then it's not rented out, so why the whole exercise? Park their money?
I don't know how verifiable it is, but the general narrative has been a lot is Chinese parking their money outside the reach of the CCP. I've never quite understood the mechanics of this though.
basically, yes.
the chinese government owns all land and all banks. they snap their fingers and you have nothing.
you put it into japanese, usa, canadian housing, etc. etc. under a company flagged in bermuda and you're covered.
Apparently they’re listed but people aren’t biting? Though this was a while back so maybe things have changed
Is that a thing? I remember a few years ago when they added a bunch of regulations to rentals that raised the costs.
I'm guessing they get a business visa based on claiming revenue from the rentals, then use that to sponsor more people as employees.
As for regulation costs, airbnbs are notorious for not adhering to regulations. Depends on how well Japan is able to police it.
There are no residence requirements for buying property in Japan. So... what?
Unlike banks, many services, some Rakuten subpages, etc requiring full width, I have found real estate sites (purchase, not rent) to be the most likely to accept half-width roman characters for the name input box.
From what I have heard, japan tacks on lots of extra costs/taxes for this situation.
As someone who has been living in Japan for years now, and still has a long way to go learning the language, I generally support language proficiency requirements. First, it should be noted that these are fairly common sense requirements designed to reduce fraud - requiring people applying for work visas that require Japanese proficiency to actually be able to speak Japanese. I suspect there will be more requirements in the future for things like permanent residency, but will wait for those to actually be implemented before commenting one way or another.
And second - it’s really hard to participate in society if you can’t speak the language. I think this creates resentment for both Japanese citizens and foreign residents alike.
I regret not studying sooner and harder, and a clear language requirement probably would have influenced me to try harder.
I did two years in Lausanne without speaking French and 9 years in Beijing with…maybe 2nd year proficiency in Chinese (better than most foreigners, but hardly fluent!). You can totally live in society without fluency, Switzerland being harder only because I never studied French before.
If you are doing work with a world market, you are kind of expected to speak the language of that work and not necessarily the country you are in.
Sounds like freetime2 is taking personal responsibility for his deficiencies which is a pretty japanese way of thinking. YMMV in the rest of the world.
From where comes the idea that taking responsibility for one's deficiencies is a Japanese way of thinking?
your children/garden/golf game is so amazing, mine is so humble/terrible/etc...
> And second - it’s really hard to participate in society if you can’t speak the language. I think this creates resentment for both Japanese citizens and foreign residents alike.
I basically agree, but there are two problems with this:
1) the JLPT is a test of fairly academic reading and listening (for those unfamiliar, it’s basically the equivalent of the US SAT reading/vocab section in terms of difficulty). There’s no speaking or communication requirement. I probably cannot pass N2, despite being conversant and functional in everyday life at a high B1 level.
2) The populations who are most likely to abuse the current system are fairly notorious for being able to pass the exam without real communication ability. I know a fair number of people who were able to pass without being able to have even a basic conversation at the time.
Language schools here are essentially factories designed to shove kanji readers through the JLPT in minimum time, with little attention paid to conversation. Overall, this feels like a sledgehammer approach to a screwdriver problem.
Not sure why your comment is downvoted, because it hits the issue dead center, namely it's completely possible to pass either of the required tests (N2/J2) and not being able to speak a single word of Japanese in a live conversation.
That's why at least one category of applicants abusing the visa (Chinese) will continue to do so without any issues.
There are a lot of folks who do not want to hear anything truthful if it violates their sense of national justice.
I don't have a dog in the fight. I just think the current "solution" is blunt, and will end up damaging both the Japanese economy, and a bunch of people who were never "the problem", per se.
Japan is importing record numbers of workers. Most convenience stores and supermarkets in my town (far from Tokyo) are staffed by 'language school students' (an you can work 28 hours a week on a student visa). Agreements [1] between Japan and other countries to bring more workers are making headlines. At the same time, it's getting harder and harder to stay.
Permanent residency applications are being judged incredibly strictly. Citizenship applications need 10 years of continuous residence up from 5. Business manager visas have gone from needing 5m yen of capital to 30m yen.
It seems pretty clear that the goal is to get workers in for some productive years but make the path for staying difficult. I guess that's one way to solve an aging population problem.
To put things in perspective, Japan is an island and has entry and exit controls on the borders, so it is estimated that 0.05% of the population is illegal immigrants (people not leaving when their visa runs out). And the police can and do stop visible minorities to confirm their residence status on the spot. It is compulsory to carry identification documents if you are a foreigner. (There are questions about the legality of this but it is common and widely practiced).
[1] https://www.japantimes.co.jp/business/2025/10/27/india-valua...
I'm guessing you never travelled anywhere else in your life?
> Japan ... has entry and exit controls on the borders, ... It is compulsory to carry identification documents if you are a foreigner.
This is true for almost all the countries in the world, especially the second part.
[dead]
> The new benchmark has been set at the equivalent of the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) B2 level.
B2 is upper intermediate. Probably 2-5 years of study
https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-referen...
Or JLPT N2. Which is quite difficult - approx 4000 words and 1000 kanji. That's several years of learning for all but the most proficient.
(The scale starts at N5 and lower numbers are harder)
It should be noted that JLPT is not a direct equivalent to CEFR. CEFR requires you to pass speaking and writing, JLPT does not demand you to be able to write, or speak, at all. IT only tests listening and reading. This ironically means that while yeah, you will be able to read a LOT of kanji with JLPT N2, you might not be anywhere near B2 level at speaking and conversation, and probably not at all when it comes to writing (writing Kanji is a whole other thing beyond being able to read, it requires dedicated practice, but anyways a lot of people now don't need to since you can type it out on your phone or computer, and just copy that onto the form or whatever you are writing on)
Speaking as someone who reads around N2 level but can barely ask for directions, this is on the mark. I self-study and have few means or reasons to practice speaking, so it's never been a priority for me.
But I think this arrangement is actually quite...realistic? Charitable? It's very hard to become conversationally fluent in a language - especially one as foreign for most learners as Japanese is - without the kind of serious immersion you can most easily get just by living in the country (though maybe I'm just making excuses for myself). Asking learners to do the groundwork and get the foundations at home before getting hit with that immersion is going to set them up for success, facilitate their smooth integration, and demonstrates a candidate's seriousness. My impression is that in such a situation most learners will improve their speaking skills quickly, but there's no getting around months and years of drilling kanji.
> have few means or reasons to practice speaking
Hellotalk or italki are great for this.
There's probably not much value in JLPT adding a writing component, however, I do believe that the lack of a speaking component is really disappointing. Being able to consume a language is one thing, being able to produce in it, is another, and vital for someone who will be working and living there.
I think every country should do this. What I am seeing these days is that people who deserve visas are struggling with visa issues, while untalented people are getting visas easily
I agree too. And before the pearl clutching starts, I’m very much practicing what I preach as an American seriously considering retiring to a Spanish speaking country and who just came back from the target country after spending six weeks there - and planning on returning once or twice a year.
I’m learning Spanish and find it disheartening that many of the ex-pats [1] I hung out with don’t even attempt to learn Spanish. I’m currently somewhere around an A2/low B1.
[1] yes I also am against people calling themselves “ex-pats” instead of “immigrants”
It depends on the work you are going to be doing. For example, if you are going to do research, then it is more important that you speak and write fluently in English, than whatever language is spoken in the country you'll be working in.
Though being fluent in the local language will, of course, make your life a lot easier
I mean, seems fair.
If I'm applying for a work visa where the work I'm doing would require me to know Japanese, I should know Japanese.
The key thing is that the ESI category includes a lot of work which you don't need to know Japanese. For example, software engineering jobs in Japan are often at either larger multinational companies or companies with enough presence outside of Japan that they have teams which are in English.
Japan has been on a recent anti-immigration kick via making visas harder and more expensive to get while also blaming them for all of their problems which, isn't really gonna work out for multiple reasons.
> software engineering jobs in Japan are often at either larger multinational companies or companies with enough presence outside of Japan that they have teams which are in English.
Just because you work in a multinational company where they have English speaking teams does not mean that you should not know the language. It is weird to assume that just because your first job is with an English speaking team you will always work with those teams or in that company at all.
What about daily life? Communication is a fundamental part of your activity as a civilian imo. Not understanding what is going on in a country without using some device to translate for you is not acceptable. Whether in a train or during an earthquake you must always be able to communicate.
> Not understanding what is going on in a country without using some device to translate for you is not acceptable
I knew an American guy who worked for Yahoo Japan in Tokyo for 10 years, and still had zero desire to learn the language.
But the law doesn't apply to all ESI jobs, just a subset which (ostensibly) do need to know Japanese.
This is true that it primarily applies to jobs which say they need to know Japanese as an attempt to prevent fraud, but realistically it doesn't actually accomplish anything beyond punishing honest businesses. Companies will just lie about the language requirements, and visa holders will have no incentive to properly report the fraud because they run the risk of their visa being revoked and kicked out of the country.
There are smarter ways to implement a language requirement, and really this is part of a trend of Japan tightening up restrictions on foreigners to try and solve a perceived problem by a fraction of a fraction of individuals.
See, I would have figured the "Specialist in Humanities" part of it would not include software development.
I just looked up the definition/qualifications for it and I misunderstood the bit.
I thought it was sub categories. Engineers, who are Specialists in Humanities, who are doing International Services.
But it's more like three different categories. Engineers OR Specialists in Humanities OR International Services.
It seems like they could just move International Services to its own category. (Based on the information in this link: https://portal.jp-mirai.org/en/work/s/highly-skilled-hr/giji...)
Teaching English is humanities though, not IS, so that doesn't work. (To clarify, teaching at any sort of private company. A K12 school has a dedicated Instructor class that can't be used for anything else.) And translating (which requires proficiency) is IS in some cases I think?
I also initially read it as "this is an example of the type of category that would have the requirement". Which doesn't preclude other categories also needing the requirement.
Why do you need that requirement be validated by people and at a level not connection to the place of work?
Presumably 1. the "places of work" are not doing sufficient validation, and therefore 2. regulation is needed when the non-regulated path is failing.
Unless the places of work are vetted, setting up a company to offer a job, and collect fees for offering said "jobs", would seem to be a simple way of committing fraud in that case.
So either you vet the companies offering those jobs, or you vet the visa applicants.
Because the government is responsible for border control and immigration?
The alternative is that the company must provide evidence, but I don't see how this is better.
The first doesn't explain anything - the government was responsible before this new policy, so having no such policy doesn't go agasint that fact. Also other alternatives exist
To prevent fraud. It's the same reason governments have driving tests and tax or grant audits. If the government deferred to applicants for everything, there'd be no point in the application process.
Sure, there's a libertarian argument against limiting visas, imposing taxes, and issuing grants, but if you are going to, it requires some amount of enforcement to prevent rampant fraud.
This assumes the government itself isn't the one doing the fraud.
Countries are not just places you work, first of all.
ironically the first people who would disagree with you are the people who passed this piece of legislation
slightly more seriously though work is one place where language acquisition happens organically, work is where culture emerges and despite the grievances I have with Anglosphere one great aspect of it is that they are never so frail to think that language can or must be imposed by a commissioner.
Are you kidding?
One of the first things the Anglosphere did was enforce language customs. I think you should review a bit of the history here. Why do you think the standard language for flight is English? To the extent that language acquisition happens at the office, it comes at the expense of actually getting work done.
>If I'm applying for a work visa where the work I'm doing would require me to know Japanese, I should know Japanese.
the naturalization act of 1906 and the immigration act of 1917 , in the US, were some of the hardest fought-for and controversial laws ever put in place.
The immigration act got vetod by 3 different sitting presidents in different forms , and the naturalization act included a 'free white persons & natives' clause that screwed over a lot of people.
It was pretty widely seen as a method to minimize poor working people. Both laws were used a ton during the commie red scare against citizens, and the 1917 law is essentially held responsible for the separation of families / 'port of entry tragedies' that separated families based on things like language.
now : i'm not saying that Japan is walking in the same foot-steps, just pointing out that language/culture exclusivity within legal spheres usually ends poorly for the people.
Ok, but neither of those are about work visas.
If I'm applying for a work visa, it's because I expect to be in that country to work, not as a permanent resident.
Without knowing the numbers, I'd wager that the majority of work Visas worldwide are "dual-intent", to use the USCIS parlance. Restrictions might be higher or lower in different countries, but there's generaly a path dor moving from a work visa to permanent residency.
> I expect to be in that country to work, not as a permanent resident.
Aren't work visas basically the only realistic path to permanent residency for most people?
I think we need to acknowledge that all but the most transitory fruit pickers may want to settle permanently after working in a country for many years, and should not unreasonably be prevented from doing so.
If i were working in a country for many years, I would make some effort to learn to communicate with the other people who live in that country, before becoming a permanent resident. I understand this is very difficult; I've been studying Spanish every day for almost 2 years and I am nowhere near fluent. However, I suspect I would be further along if I lived somewhere where people commonly spoke Spanish.
There is nothing unreasonable about if you want to live in a country you should learn the language. I said in another comment that I’m learning Spanish now because I plan to move to a Spanish speaking country for retirement.
What is unreasonable prevention?
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[dead]
[flagged]
Went there in 2012 and then again last year. It's wild how quickly it's changed. IMO, Japan is a very special place and it's sad to see that it's having the same problems as the rest of the first world.
The worst I saw was a flood of American tourists in Shinjuku. What did you see that changed?
[dead]
[dead]
So, on one hand, this is an excusable policy (as in, there are already immigration law apologists in here making excuses for it).
On the other hand, I don't like immigration control as a concept - countries should not operate like hereditary country clubs, and people should not have less freedom of movement than bags of money. More self-interestedly, I'm an American, and I know my country's infrastructure - both political and otherwise - is failing horribly. I don't want out yet, but I know I'm going to need out at some point in my lifetime. So every time I see a favorable country locking their doors, I shudder.
There's probably going to be at least one reply from a European saying this is a good thing - that American citizens (or, if things get really bad, American refugees) should be denied entry, under the theory that immigration is a welfare / free money for thieves program and that letting people leave destroyed countries just rewards people for destroying them.
This is, of course, bullshit, both because it's victim blame-y, AND because it covers up a shortcoming of the country making the excuse. The real reason countries try to avoid taking in refugees is that most countries are built like hereditary country clubs. They don't take in immigrants, so they don't know how to integrate immigrants. Japan in particular has a community of poorly-integrated American emigrants that largely just stick to themselves.
America, ironically enough, is one of the few countries that actually cracked the code on immigration. We used to have really generous family reunion visa programs, we have basically every immigrant population you can think of in every major city, and immigrants that come here integrate way better than ones that go to Europe. So it's not like countries have to be restrictive on immigration.
Instead, what I'm seeing is that immigration is being used by politicians to distract from their own countries' failings. It's the same story as what happened in America[1]: when shit breaks, people get rich off selling the fix, and so they pay[0] politicians to keep the system broken enough that they can continue profiting off of it. But this only works if you give the people some kind of excuse. The politics of scarcity are brutal, but scarcity becomes a far easier sell if you have a scapegoat. Some magical source of systemic burden you can shed without backlash. "The state-run insurance system isn't broken because we don't pay our doctors, it's broken because we have too many poor patients from other countries!"
[0] Not necessarily in the "bribery is free speech" way America does it, of course.
[1] Which would indicate to me that perhaps leaving the country is a fool's errand, if every other country is on the same curve.