Talk:Japanese pension system

Exemptions, etc

Some rationale for edits in this section:

Exemptions: I've listed these as full, 3/4, 1/2, 1/4 rather than the previous version which used percentages. The reason is that I've tabulated the exemption types with the benefit factors, and keeping everything as fractions is cleaner than dealing with 33.3% in the case of 1/3 benefit. (Also it directly correlates to the terminology used by the Japan Pension site.)

Postponement: I've separated this from exemptions, as there is a key difference. I've combined the two cases (students and low income individuals under 50 not granted an exemption) so as to be more concise than the info on the Japan Pension site.

Students: the previous text read:

"For example. A fulltime student aged 20+ may request to have their years of study count towards contributing years without making contributions. This will not affect the amount of pension they receive only the number of years in the system. It also prevents the Pension Office from pursuing unpaid contributions."

This has been edited for clarity. 'Not affect the amount of pension they receive' could be read as 'the pension will be the same whether contributions are postponed or not' (ie not affected). Unless postponed contributions are later paid, the benefit amount is different for those who have postponed and those who have not.

--Kuma (talk) 10:49, 13 September 2021 (JST)

Rename to "Pension"?

I'm considering renaming this article to "Pension". There are other kinds of pensions, so not sure if the general title is confusing, given the context I think Japanese is implicit. Any objections? Will make the change next week if not. －Adamu (talk) 01:06, 18 September 2021 (JST)

Another option would be "State pension" (or "State Pension"). "Pension" would be okay, but would/should the page eventually have a section covering non-state pensions, and in particular, DCs/iDeCo? "National Pension" wouldn't work well as the name suggests only "Kokumin Nenkin" would be covered. But any decision here is reversible, so no objections! --Kuma (talk) 21:39, 20 September 2021 (JST)

There are no policies decided here, so it's just an idea. The main reason was for linkability, e.g. [[pension]], but a good article title also makes sense too. I'll probably leave it for now, and keep an eye on how we link to this page. －Adamu (talk) 22:14, 20 September 2021 (JST)

Overall content and structure

I think this page is growing nicely. It's an important topic for foreign residents of Japan. There are so many sub-topics that I hope the core info doesn't get lost, and am all for the intro being a simple and clear overview.

Main source (for kokumin nenkin) - the JPS National Pension English page is very well written and covers a lot of key territory in clear and concise language but does have some notable deficiencies for an international readership: one key exception to compulsory coverage is not listed, 'karakikan' is not covered, etc. Also, it lacks links to forms. At times, info might be better presented in tables instead of words, as per the exemptions. Great to have the kosei nenkin info tabulated in English - hats off to the wizardry behind that!

Intro - nice and simple, but currently mentions 'system' too many times (and suggests there is both one system and two systems... which there kind of are... but we should clarify using more precise language in future iterations). Agree to move the exceptions to a sub-section, but there is an important distinction between exceptions and exemptions: the former don't give benefits, but the latter do. Thus, let's separate into two sub-sections. (I had considered the exceptions as a footnote, but then I wanted to include references, and footnotes of footnotes don't work; so I like Adamu's solution in principle, but with the aforementioned structural edit.)

For Fuka Nenkin, I trialled giving an overview in the main text and then some more in-depth content on a sub-page. Thoughts?

--Kuma (talk) 13:13, 22 September 2021 (JST)

In the specific edit that I think inspired this comment, I was concerned that people opening the article would be immediately confronted with a list of exceptions and exceptions, which could be a bit overwhelming. There's a balance I think between providing an easy to grasp summary, and also getting into the nitty-gritty. I think we have a good opportunity to provide accurate English info on complex topics in a way that blogs with single-maintainers can't do - so I don't want to discourage that - but I also don't want to alienate people by reading like a legal document from the first paragraph. :-)

Re: exemption/exception, I think this distinction is quite confusing - I'm guessing that the people eligible for "exception"s might not be reading this wiki. Or to put it another way, maybe "exemption"s will be more relevant to the readership (I shouldn't assume who the readership are though!). It also could be a distinction we made up, rather than official terminology (not a bad thing, if it's accurate and makes things easy to understand). The Pension service is pretty good at providing English information, I wonder if they have specific terminology? I noticed the 8.pdf form uses the word "exclusion" for what the article refers to as "exception". －Adamu (talk) 15:44, 25 September 2021 (JST)

Totally agree that it is a balance and that we are aiming for accurate, readable, relevant and helpful information, and certainly do not want to alienate people. A concern on an earlier version of this page was that the opening sentence was potentially inaccurate (coverage compulsory for all residents; which is true in principle, but there are exceptions); the Japan Pension service chose an asterisk and footnote to clarify that there are statuses of residence for which this does not apply, but did not note the other exemption/exclusion in the same place -- people for whom social security agreements deem them liable be covered by the other country rather than Japan. (The wording 'in principle' could also be added to the opening statement; might be another way to note that there are some exceptions, but by and large, coverage is compulsory.)

Also, yes, I think exemptions will be more relevant to the readership than exclusions. There's an argument that exclusions should come first... if you are excluded, then the remainder of the article is redundant; if not, read on, and could you be subject to an exemption? Or 'Exemptions, Postponements and Exclusions' could be a combined section, with the presumed most relevant 'Exemptions' topic first within this section, and we could tabulate the eligibility and differences between the three to attempt to reduce confusion... though there's a danger this could have the opposite effect! Not something I will attempt at this point in time.

I've seen the information from JPS using the terminology 'exclusion'... and will park that for now, as edits on this section might take a bit of time and thought. --Kuma (talk) 04:51, 14 October 2021 (JST)

Tax on JP state pensions

The article would benefit from a small discussion, maybe in the Q&A, on taxation when receiving state pensions. This article appears to cover the subject [[1]]. Noting here to digit this and summarize in future, and not forget about it! --TBS (talk) 02:04, 23 October 2021 (JST)

That sounds like it's worth its own section to me! Also, thanks for your recent edits. Good to have you here. －Adamu (talk) 19:07, 23 October 2021 (JST)

Ok added some first info. Next step is to populate the Pension Tax Deduction page. －TBS (talk) 00:08, 24 October 2021 (JST)