Some benefits after returning to U.S.A

An american friend who is just coming up for retirement after working nearly
all his life in Japan, is thinking that he will only be allowed to continue
working at his present company in Japan if they pay him less than half of
what he is currently earning. That reduced money would be a big struggle for
him to survive on.

He does not think there will be any alternative for him, than to accept this
reduced pay. He would like to return to America, but since he did not
contribute to any pension schemes, he thinks this would not be possible
since he would have no income to survive on there.

Coming from Europe myself I guess I automatically have faith that the state
will somehow come through for us in straightened circumstances. But do not
have any knowledge of what the situation would be in the U.S.A or in fact
how to find out exactly what benefits might be available for a returning
american citizen.

Bearing in mind he has spent nearly all his working life working outside of
the U.S.A., and has made no pension contributions, would be grateful to
learn of what his circumstances would likely be, income wise in terms of
basic benefits; if he just took the plunge and returned to his homeland.
Thanks.

 

I would assume he went to Japan to earn more money than he could have
earned in America. He worked out there his entire adult life and never
gave any thought to retirement? Now he wants us to tote the bill?

I resent him putting his hand out. He could have saved some of his
considerable income, or he could have potentially earned less while
participating in the various retirement plans of American companies
along with the government run Social Security. Now he wants me to help
support him through my taxes? He's got some nerve.

BTW, it's considered respectful to refer to Americans as "Americans"
with a capital "A", just as we would refer to the citizens of Japan as
"Japanese" with a capital "J".


Jay

 

Plenty of people have done the same thing.
If he is expecting the US government to help him out because he is broke,
forget it. Ain't gonna happen.
If his job is available in the USA, what's stopping him from working there?

My father retired from his previous job of 33 years. Did that stop him any?
Hell no. Even though he could have sat around the house doing nothing all
day, he went to work as a consultant for another 15 years.

I'm nearly 60 now. Retired from trucking a few years ago. I have my plans
of going to school to learn something new. No reason why your friend can't
go back to school for another career.

 

Your father had gumption, was a smart man. He also invested wisely.

You didn't retire, you quit when your successful father died and left
you a sizable seven-figure inheritance. This is not private information;
you said so yourself on your web site.

When you run low of cash, "All I have to do is phone the attorney and
have more money sent to my bank account."

What? There's a school for "mall cop?"

 

-------------------------------------------------------------
Your friend might want to think about retirement by assessing his
real assets: health, time, friends, relatives, possessions, marketable
skills. You say he earned enough to live in Japan during the boom
years, which suggests a very large income by U.S. standards. He is
well ahead of the game if his job will continue, even at reduced pay.
Unless he has very unusual skills, the U.S. job market is a guarantee
of greater poverty than he's facing in Japan. That said, I do
understand from personal experience that one can simply reach the end
of one's working life.
Imho the most important questions are where he was living all
this time, whether he speaks the language fluently, whether he is in
comfortably conversant with Japanese life, wether he has Japanese
friends and family. Is he in Tokyo, where it takes a rich man to live
a middle-class life. If so, does he own his apartment. Is he in a
town/village somewhere, living in his own house with his Japanese wife
and children. Does he have any investments anywhere in the U.S.
If he didn't contribute to U.S. pension funds, I suspect he
hasn't read the simple requirements for collecting the American old-
age pension.
I'm sorry those questions are not as helpful as you hoped for, but
here's a start:
----------------------------------------------------

http://www.ssa.gov/retire2/international.htm

HOW INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS CAN HELP YOU

If you are among the growing number of Americans who spend part of
their career working outside the U.S., you may wonder what effect this
will have on your Social Security taxes and benefits. Fortunately, the
United States has concluded Social Security agreements with a number
of other countries that help you avoid double taxation while working
abroad and also help protect your future benefit rights.
Your work overseas may help you to qualify for U.S. benefits if it
was covered under a foreign Social Security system.
One of the main purposes of the international agreements is to
help people who have worked in both the United States and the other
country, but who have not worked long enough in one country or the
other to qualify for Social Security benefits. Under the agreement, we
can count your work credits in the other country if this will help you
qualify for U.S. benefits. However, if you already have enough credit
under U.S. Social Security to qualify for a benefit, we will not count
your credits in the other country.
If we have to count your foreign work credits, you will receive a
partial U.S. benefit that is related to the length of time you worked
under U.S. Social Security. Although we may count your work credits in
the other country, your credits are not actually transferred from that
country to the United States. They remain on your record in the other
country. It is therefore possible for you to qualify for a separate
benefit payment from both countries.
For more information about the agreements, including details about
specific agreements in force, read www.socialsecurity.gov/international/totalization_agreements.html.
If you will receive a pension from a foreign government based on
your work, the amount of your Social Security benefit may be affected
by the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP).

Agreement Country
Nov. 1, 1978 Japan

For more information about other agreements, read How International
Agreements Can Help You.
--------------------------------------------------------

 

It's called "Kaplan University" and you can go online...

You has to Goggle for "Mall Kop Degree" and it's like
the first hit.

HTH.

PS, there *might* be a course in "Walmart Greeter" too,
and eligible for a Pell Grant assistance.

--


I AM Bucky Breeder, (*(^; ; and *I* approve this message,
read straight off of Sarah Palin's Cheat-Sheet-Palm notes.

HELP! I cain't find teh "Any Key" :

http://9gag.com/photo/20841_full.jpg

Repent! The end is near.... So, smoke 'em if you got 'em.

 

Now here's an example of real life decisions having real life consequences.
The "state" here in the United States is us, the American taxpayer and the
American voter. Exactly what is the rationale of this friend of yours that
he be treated differently than the rest of us?

 

he can fly to europe and drown himself in the bosphorus! OMG yeah i
said it

 

The politically-inspired responses from the ignorant denizens of this
newsgroup are probaly incorrect. The US and Japan do indeed have a
"Totalization Agreement" which might enable him to get *some*
benefits. For details see:

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/international/Agreement_Pamphlets/japan.html

"Agreements to coordinate Social Security protection across national
boundaries have been common in Western Europe for decades. Following
is a list of the agreements the United States has concluded and the
date of the entry into force of each. Some of these agreements were
subsequently revised; the date shown is the date the original
agreement entered into force."

Italy November 1, 1978
Germany December 1, 1979
Switzerland November 1, 1980
Belgium July 1, 1984
Norway July 1, 1984
Canada August 1, 1984
United Kingdom January 1, 1985
Sweden January 1, 1987
Spain April 1, 1988
France July 1, 1988
Portugal August 1, 1989
Netherlands November 1, 1990
Austria November 1, 1991
Finland November 1, 1992
Ireland September 1, 1993
Luxembourg November 1, 1993
Greece September 1, 1994
South Korea April 1, 2001
Chile December 1, 2001
Australia October 1, 2002
Japan October 1, 2005
Denmark October 1, 2008
Czech Republic January 1, 2009
Poland March 1, 2009

 

From the original post -

"...he did not contribute to any pension schemes..."

"Bearing in mind he has spent nearly all his working life working outside of
the U.S.A., and has made no pension contributions..."

The reference you cite talks about Social Security payments having been made
to either country. Original post says no pension contributions have been
made, whereby the operative presumption is that no Social Security payments
have been made to either country. Note well that the original post is
seeking information of possible government - "state" - benefits.

Clearly if he did not contribute to any private plans, he gets no benefits
from any private plan. So the context of the original post is not that of
any private plan, but of a government one. Now he not having made any
contributions to a government plan, the original post asks what government
benefits are available to him. The reference you cite is valid in the
context of him having made contributions to the one government plan or the
other. But - to repeat - he has made no contributions to any - repeat,
any - "pension schemes". Given his situation of having made absolutely no
pension contributions at all - least of all to any government plan - the
reference you cite is a non sequitur vis a vis his situation.

 

A Thank You to:
Lawrence Akutagawa and
Rubaiyat of Omar Bradley.
Excellent information.
John North;
Your friend possible can research the cost of living in different parts
of the U.S.A.and what income is needed for retirement, using the
internet. Keeping in mind cost of living increases and health care.
Most people in the U.S.A. with the exception of receiving Social
Security and Medicare, if paid into these programs, are left to their
own devices concerning retirement.
Wish your friend a comfortable retirement.

 

You don't know that for a fact - the original post was not that
specific.

 

You don't know that for a fact - the original post was not that
specific.

******
Of course not. You are right. I do not know for a fact. On the other
hand, how do you interpret

"...he did not contribute to any pension schemes..."

"Bearing in mind he has spent nearly all his working life working outside of
the U.S.A., and has made no pension contributions..."

To clarify the situation, perhaps the original poster can make precisely
clear whether the individual concerned did make contributions to a
government plan. And if there were indeed such contributions, then the
original poster can perhaps also clarify those two statements I quoted from
the original post.

 

Since I have no personal experience with the Japanese Social Security
system, I looked it up at
http://www.mofa.go.jp/j_info/japan/socsec/maruo/maruo_5.html

This article specifically states that all Japanese have been covered
by Social Security and national health insurance since 1961.

 

If he is age 65 or more, he might qualify for SSI - see
http://www.ssa.gov/ssi/text-eligibility-ussi.htm

 

What the cited article does not explain is what kind of pension benefits -
if any - a person who has not paid any premiums can get. This - not
coverage - is the issue posed in the original post.

from http://www.sia.go.jp/e/np.html

"You can receive the Old-age Basic Pension at the age of 65 if you have been
covered under the National Pension and Employees’ Insurance systems. To
satisfy contribution requirements, your total insurable periods* need to be
25 years or more.

"* Your total insurable periods include your contribution-paid period,
contribution-exempted period and other qualifying period when you are
covered as the Category ?, Category ? or Category ? insured persons.

"Benefit Amount

"(Yen)792,100 / year (full benefit amount for 40 years of contribution
payment)

"If you have not contributed or have been exempted from payment, the amount
is:
(Yen)792,100 x (?+?+?+?+?) / 40 years * x 12
?Number of contribution-paid months
?Number of full contribution-exempted months** x 1/3
?Number of three-quarter contribution-exempted months** x 1/2
?Number of half contribution-exempted months** x 2/3
?Number of one-quarter contribution-exempted months** x 5/6
* Shorter for some people, depending on date of birth
**Depending on your income or according to the National Pension Law, you may
be granted an exemption of full- or partial- amount of contribution
payment."

Given that the friend in the original post has made no contributions and is
not exemption eligible (read the article for exemption
eligibility...basically, you have to be disabled/poor, you have to apply for
the exemption, and the exemption has to have been approved), my take from
this passage is that his benefit is zero. If your conclusion from reading
this passage and the cited link is different, please explain.

And I still am interested in your take of those two passages in the original
post that I quoted:

"...he did not contribute to any pension schemes..."

"Bearing in mind he has spent nearly all his working life working outside of
the U.S.A., and has made no pension contributions..."

While - as I said - I don't know for fact that that he did not make any
contributions to a government plan, allow me to logically observe the
following:
1. If he contributed to a private pension plan, those two statements would
be false.
2. If he contributed to the Japanese government pension plan, those two
statements would be false.
3. If he contributed to the United States government pension plan, those two
statement would be false.

So given that the two statements are true, my understanding logically is
that he contributed nothing to a private pension plan, to the Japanese
government pension plan, and to the United States government pension plan.

If your understanding differs from mine, I eagerly look forward to your
explanation of how your understanding is logically consistent with those two
statements.

 

If he is age 65 or more, he might qualify for SSI - see
http://www.ssa.gov/ssi/text-eligibility-ussi.htm

*****
But SSI - Supplemental Security Income - is not Social Security benefits.
It reads more like a welfare program rather than a pension program. Read
the criteria for SSI:

Income criteria http://www.ssa.gov/ssi/text-income-ussi.htm
Countable income no more than SSI Federal Benefit rate
The SSI Federal Benefit rate currently (2010) is
http://www.ssa.gov/ssi/text-benefits-ussi.htm
$674 per month for an individual
$1,011 per month for a couple

Resource criteria http://www.ssa.gov/ssi/text-resources-ussi.htm
Countable assets no more that $2,000 for individual, $3,000 for couple

If I understand the presented explanation, if you have zero countable income
the SSI Federal Benefit rate is the maximum benefit you can receive given
you meet the resource criteria. That is something, which is hands down
better than nothing, but not one heck of a lot of something.

 

But he isnt japanese, he's american.

 

That means the population of Japan, not the racial/ethnic group.

Until and unless john north (the original poster) clarifies the exact
situation that he is aluding to, in detail, I don't think an exact and
correct response is going to be forthcoming (including from me).