Posts Tagged ‘retirement’

What the government doesn’t pay in pensions it will have to make up for with welfare

Monday, July 7th, 2014

One of the biggest fiscal issues — if not the biggest fiscal issue — facing the government is the expected steep increase in the number of seniors who will require welfare benefits after retirement. Everyone assumes that the various national pension systems by themselves are not enough to sustain a minimum standard of living for the people who receive them, and so they will need additional income, either in terms of savings, returns from investments or wages.

Back to work?

Back to work?

In a recent survey conducted by the prime minister’s office and whose target respondents were people between the ages of 35 and 64, nearly 70 percent said that they are not now, nor do they think they will be, financially prepared for retirement. The government, anticipating this reality, several years ago passed a law to ensure that people who wish to work after their designated retirement age will be able to do so, though, as is often the case with socially-minded legislation, there is no compulsion toward employers to make this happen or any penalties if they don’t. It’s up to the employee and the employer working together.

In any case, when asked if they want to work after “retirement,” 31.4 percent of the respondents said they would after the age of 65, and 20.9 percent said they would want to do so after the age of 70. That means more than 52 percent want to work after the age of 60, which is still the standard retirement age at most companies. When asked why they want to work, 77 percent said “to make a living.”

As far as people who are trying to save money for their old age, only 1.6 percent admitted to having “more than enough,” with 21.7 percent saying they have saved or expect to have saved “the minimum necessary.” Of those who answered that they haven’t saved enough, half admit that their savings is “almost nothing,” with 74 percent in the 35-39 age bracket saying their savings is “insufficient,” which probably means nothing so far.

But perception of what they need is also an important consideration. In a survey conducted in June of 2013, the Ministry of Internal Affairs found that the average household whose head is between 60 and 69 spent ¥259,695 a month. This amount dropped to ¥196,500 for households whose head was over 70. According to another survey conducted by the Central Council for Financial Services Information, respondents who are currently working believe, on average, that a retired person needs ¥260,000 a month to live off of.

The government organ, Japan Pension Service, says that the monthly pension income of a retired “model household” is ¥230,000 a month, which comes down to ¥100,000 for a husband who was enrolled in the company sponsored koseinenkin system, ¥65,000 for the same husband’s basic pension (kiso nenkin), and his wife’s own basic pension of ¥65,000. The model assumes that the husband and his employer paid into both pension systems for a full 40 years, and since the dependent wife, as the spouse of a full-time regular employee, is categorized as a “number 3″ national pension subscriber, she is assumed to have paid her fair share, even though, in reality, she paid nothing.

This model household, however, represents a minority. Many other households have heads who are non-regular workers or who were not consistent in terms of payment schedules over the years. And there are other factors that can reduce what a household can expect. The JPS survey found in July 2013 that the average retired household of a former regular employee who paid into the koseinenkin system was ¥215,780. The monthly benefit for people who paid into the basic pension system for a full forty years is now ¥65,541 a month, but the average payout is ¥49,947. Households whose heads are between 60 and 69 said on average that their pension income was 44,000 less than what they needed.

This latter point is important because payments for the basic pension don’t start until age 65 for both spouses, so even for a model household, that means if the breadwinner retires at 60, their pension income is only ¥100,000 for five years. That means they would need another ¥160,000 to reach the level that most people now think you need when you retire. So for those five years, the couple will be short about ¥9 million in total.

In addition, the government is trying to extend the starting age for koseinenkin payments. Right now it starts at 61, but eventually the government wants it to start at 65, or even later, so that limit will rise gradually in the future, further reducing the pension amounts that people receive if they retire at 60. That’s why the government is trying to encourage employers to retain employees even after their mandatory retirement age. According to Asahi Shimbun, employees who are retained after retirement are essentially let go and then rehired at one-fourth to one-third their former salaries. There is nothing in the new law that guarantees a minimum wage for these workers.

And with boomer retirement increasing through to the middle of the next decade, it’s assumed that senior welfare rolls will just keep increasing as well. In 2011, 46.4 percent of the 2 million people on welfare were over 65. The majority of these people are seniors who only receive basic pensions and have no other income or property. The only bright spot is that many boomers already own their homes, so at least they won’t end up on the streets.

Government’s new scheme to bolster social security is still hopeless

Monday, March 10th, 2014

This document was sent out several years ago after the government discovered that it had lost the pension payment records of 50 million people. The document would be used to help locate those records. The program was expensive, but very few people responded.

This document was sent out several years ago after the government discovered that it had lost the pension payment records of 50 million people. The document would be used to help locate those records. The program was expensive, but very few people responded.

The Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare has announced that starting in April it will “take action” to increase the “collection rate” of national pension premiums, specifically those for kokumin nenkin, the obligatory pension plan for the self-employed and those who otherwise don’t belong to the company-supported kosei nenkin pension system. According to Tokyo Shimbun the idea is to send warning letters to individuals whose incomes are more than ¥4 million and who haven’t contributed for at least 13 consecutive months.

Presumably, the next step will be for the ministry to start siezing assets. The initial criteria would target approximately 140,000 pension scofflaws. Eventually, however, they will go after everyone who hasn’t paid, and since it is estimated that close to 3 million people who should be paying into the system haven’t been for at least 24 months, the job seems daunting if not impossible.

There are many reasons for this delinquency, but the main one has to do with the system itself. Basic pensions apply not only to the self-employed, but anyone who is employed part-time or on a contract basis, meaning their employers don’t pay into the kosei nenkin system. It also includes the unemployed, because according to the law every adult who lives in Japan must belong to the system, whether they work or not. And the premiums are the same, regardless of income or lack thereof: right now ¥15,250 a month (it goes up gradually every year).

The ministry assumes that about 90,000 people who should be “members” are not, and that number is probably higher, but in any case, excluding those who are exempt from paying (very poor, disabled, etc.), the rate of payment into the kokumin nenkin fund was only 59 percent as of 2012, and that portion continues to decline.

In a 2011 government survey, the number one demographic of delinquents was the unemployed, which is easy to understand. However, 28 percent of delinquent payers had part-time jobs, and they said they didn’t make enough to pay. Moreover, 22 percent of the so-called deadbeats were self-employed or working in their families’ businesses. Overall, 74 percent of those who said they couldn’t pay gave their reason as “can’t afford the premiums.” The percentage is increasing because the number of non-regular employees is also increasing.

But the government says that 10.5 percent of households whose income exceeds ¥10 million have also failed to pay their fair share, and it’s these people they are citing first. After that, 17 percent of households with incomes of between ¥5 and ¥10 million are delinquent. Both of these seemingly solvent income brackets say in surveys that they, too, cannot afford the premiums due to “financial difficulties,” but there is also a considerable number who refuse to pay simply because they “don’t trust the system.”

The pension system’s fairness has always been a point of contention. As it stands, if a person pays his fair share for 40 years, the maximum monthly payment he receives at 65 will be ¥66,000, which is not enough to live off of. The main concept behind kokumin nenkin when it was first devised was that the self-employed would still have income from their businesses or the sale of their businesses when they retired. Not only is that not necessarily true, but the bulk of basic pension members are non-regular employees who have nothing else to fall back on when they retire, unless they’ve saved and invested, which is unlikely.

Also, everyone in Japan must also pay into the national health insurance plan, which for most people takes priority since anyone can get sick at any time, but you only retire when you get old. Then there are people with some money who have bought life insurance annuity plans that give them some income when they retire. They may not see the point in paying double for a pension, so they don’t bother paying nenkin.

But the most discouraging aspect of the system is that in order to receive even the minimum payment at retirement, which is less than ¥30,000 a month, you have to pay into the system for at least 25 years. Regardless of one’s mathematical skills, it doesn’t take much calculating to understand that paying ¥15,000 a month for 25 years for a pension that will be so low one will have to apply for supplemental welfare (which is increasingly the case) is not worth it.

What’s particularly maddening about the government’s refusal to acknowledge reality is that it continues to throw money at the problem. Tokyo Shimbun estimates that for every ¥100 that the ministry will collect with its new hardline policy starting in April, it will spend ¥90. In real terms, the ministry has budgeted ¥5.3 billion for “forced collections.” Also, according to the law, it can only make delinquents pay up to two years retroactively, and if the individual has been delinquent for much longer than that the individual may wonder, “What’s the point?,” since he can only receive a pension if he’s paid for a full 25 years.

There is no sense to the system, especially when you consider that the Democratic Party of Japan wanted to change it to something more rational, and made the Liberal Democratic Party promise to revise the system when it gave up the reins of government in December 2012. Since then the LDP has done nothing, because it believes that any change would be unfair to the people who have paid into the system properly all along. Famous last words.

Boomer boom: Businesses tapping consumption where they can find it

Friday, July 20th, 2012

It’s 10 a.m. Do you know where your grandmother is?

In July, the Bank of Japan released the results of its quarterly tankan survey of business sentiment for April-June. The most notable, and hardly surprising, result was the drop in confidence among major manufacturers. Less was said about the fact that domestic demand and individual consumption appear to be stabilizing. The numbers get even more encouraging when you look at specific industries.

In the tankan, an index of “0″ means no change in sentiment, with minus numbers indicating a loss of confidence and positive numbers a gain in confidence. The index for hotels and restaurants was +3, the first positive rise in five years, and a substantial one. Even more impressive was the index for “individual services,” such as travel agents, a category launched in 2004. The most recent tankan showed an index of +25. These numbers are at once heartening and baffling. Average income did not rise during the same period, which means consumption shouldn’t have risen, so why the increase in confidence?

The report’s authors credit these hopeful signs to people over 60, and smaller businesses’ resourcefulness in tapping this demographic. A recent article in Tokyo Shimbun profiled an izakaya (drinking establishment) chain called Hokkaido, which has an outlet in Kokubunji, Tokyo, that offers a special hiru enkai (daytime party) plan: If each member of a party orders at least ¥3,500 in dishes, then the party can drink as much as they like without paying extra.

Continue reading about senior citizen consumers →

Future of Japanese pension system as cloudy as ever

Friday, January 21st, 2011

One of the original planks in the Democratic Party of Japan’s 2009 platform, or manifesto as it’s normally called, was an overhaul of social security. Acknowledging that the national pension system was irreparably broken, the DPJ proposed tossing the old pay-as-you-go “insurance” model and replacing it with a system that paid benefits completely out of tax revenues. Upon retirement, every qualified person would receive ¥70,000 a month until they died.

Spend it if you got it: pension passbook

With Kaoru Yosano assuming the position of fiscal and economic policy minister in the newly reshuffled cabinet, that proposal is all but doomed. Yosano, who is against ditching the premium system, filled a similar cabinet position under the last Liberal Democratic Party prime minister, Taro Aso, so it’s not likely he’s going to change his mind even while toiling for the DPJ. In fact, Prime Minister Naoto Kan implied only a few days ago that the social security plan in the manifesto is not realistic.

What he means is that it’s not realistic politically. Practically speaking, it’s certainly more realistic than the present system, which the welfare ministry favors because they think it’s more clearly ethical when it’s really anything but. To receive benefits after retirement, one has to pay into the system at least for 25 years. If you pay for only 24 years and 11 months, you get the same benefits as someone who paid nothing: ¥0. (In comparison, in order to qualify for minimum social security in the U.S., you have to pay SS tax for at least 40 quarters, or ten years)

Rather than overhaul a failed system, the welfare ministry continues to tweak it. Two weeks ago the government approved an ¥80 decrease in the monthly premiums people pay into the basic national pension (kokumin hoken), from ¥15,100 to ¥15,020. Though the drop seems hardly significant, the news of the drop is, since it is the first time since the social security system was launched in 1961 that premiums have been reduced. The reason for the cut is downward pressure on wages caused by deflation.

Continue reading about the Japanese pension system →

RSS

Recent posts