Posted by Lawrence Akutagawa on April 15, 2010, 10:39 am
> 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.
> .
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?
Posted by �b�b�b� on April 15, 2010, 10:55 am
On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 09:34:29 +0100, john north wrote:
> 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.
he can fly to europe and drown himself in the bosphorus! OMG :P yeah i
said it
Posted by Rubaiyat of Omar Bradley on April 15, 2010, 11:14 am
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
Posted by Lawrence Akutagawa on April 15, 2010, 12:06 pm
> 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."
/snip - follow the thread/
>.
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.
Posted by NotMe on April 15, 2010, 10:53 pm
|
| > 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."
| >
| /snip - follow the thread/
| >
| >.
| 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.
|
It is entirely possible, in fact quite probable, the contributions were made
on his behalf without his express knowledge.
XML site map
> 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.
> .