Gov't to use sales tax hike revenue to expand welfare spending

What was the justification for the tax increase in the first place? Wasn't it to reduce the debt? Now, it's just going into some redistributive boondoggles, requiring MORE bureaucracy. What a SCAM!

This needs clarity. Difficult to really understand.

Never thought I'd find myself defending Abe, but....

Wait a minute! Let me get something straight here. They want to use Harding working taxpayers money to financially support lazy a** people who spend the money on cigarettes, alcohol and pachinko and not put the money into the pension system? What did i miss?

The very first paragraph mentions to help citizens in its rapidly ageing society. That means pensioners, and babies. Maybe you wouldn't have missed it if you'd taken that minute to read the article. There is no mention of giving money to people to spend on cigarettes, alcohol and pachinko.

The money will supposedly go on family allowances, healthcare and nursing care and to top up the pool of funds for the pension system.

Unfortunately nothing is earmarked for reading lessons for JT posters.

That is just a promise, not binding. Most likely will br used to procure more defense equipment so close associates can get richer.

If you believe whatever he he saying (agree the story is mushy) I have a bridge.....

The old rich pensioners should be means tested before receiving the pension, if they are creaming it off the stock market, have a second home down in Izu, travel to Hawaii and drive a benz then do they really need the pension from the govt ?

I went to a medical college hospital in Tokyo the other day and paid less than one hundred yen while it costed me 1,000 yen for transportation. This is ridiculous.

How about the money you didn't have to spend on your healthcare be used for your transportation. If you got away with paying less than 100 yen to see a doctor, I don't think you would gather any sympathy from having to pay 1000 yen for transportation.

Last time I checked, the trains and taxi's are privage businesses, and they employ people and pay them a wage, and I know this may sound harsh, but they deserve to make a profit on their business expenses.

I find it interesting that many here may denounce the USA and say that we don't provide enough services and get away with lower taxes, but when you start to get hit with some of those tax increases, all of a sudden it's a bad thing.

How cold some people are!! Very mean-spirited to think health care is a privilege!!

Time to stop playing God. Luckily those posters are not in the position to decide who lives and dies, who gets to see a doctor and who doesn't. Facists!

It's your own miseducation that would you lead you to believe that the brains of any society can live without it's other organs. You believe that another person's life or algorithm will have no effect on how you live.

There are changes that need to be made in healthcare but it's definitely something everyone should have a right to.

It comes down to personal choice Cleo. I chose to live within my means rather than get in debt. My children will not be able to afford college. They will have to get a job at 16, or an apprenticeship. People are not owed tax money from the working poor.

The old rich pensioners should be means tested before receiving the pension, if they are creaming it off the stock market, have a second home down in Izu, travel to Hawaii and drive a benz then do they really need the pension from the govt ?

If people haven't saved for their old age, that is their look out, why should my working family support people who have been irresponsible? If I had been financially irresponsible I would not expect a single yen from the government.

Do you understand how the pension system in Japan works? These people have all paid into the system. Don't you agree that they are entitled to at least what they contributed?? Perhaps you also propose that banks offer minus interest for people with mid-high incomes! If not, I do not understand your point at all.

He sold that tax increase as necessary to make a dent in the huge public debt, not to fund welfare.

I believe you're incorrect on this. I remember reading that they said this would be used to fund healthcare and welfare, and wouldn't make an impact on the debt. I'm not entirely sure that it was Abe who said that though, so I could be mistaken on the source. But I think it came from the government.

"Given very high public debt, implementation of the second consumption tax increase is critical to establish a track record of fiscal discipline" - that was from the IMF last October.

"Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe proceeded with an April sales-tax increase and a 5 trillion yen ($51 billion) stimulus plan as he tries to rein in the world’s biggest debt burden without negating efforts to end deflation." That was Bloomburg last October

Of course the debt is inextricably linked to the massive social security burden of aging Japan. Payments should not be being increased using this money, it should be to keep the country ticking along whilst reducing the debt.

I personally do not earn that much money, and the tax increase has really hit me hard. Take it off the rich, instead of the working poor.

Tax the young and give the money to the old people who are the vast majority and voters... who is going to stop this criminal?

LaWren Jan. 14, 2015 - 11:33AM JST

Hey Mr Perfect, I worked very hard for everything I have and I dont have much. No silver spoon here, yes I have a degree, and I worked and paid for that too. Japan's rich pensioners do not need to take any more tax money from my family. No paid holidays here, and unpaid overtime is the norm for our family. We work very hard, for a very poor quality of life in Japan, and the tax increases caused a real dent in our day to day finances.

But you do have a full-time job, maybe a wife working as well, you can bring your children to the hospital when they are sick, you can afford to feed and clothe your family and you probably scrounged up just enough last Christmas to throw a few presents under your Christmas tree to boot.

The people you should be attacking are not the most vulnerable ones, the elderly, the single-moms, low-income earners with children like yourself and the like who MIGHT get SOME smidgen of relief from this lame attempt to assist those in need. Maybe you should blame the fat-cats, the construction industry, the corporations who will receive a much bigger share of your tax money in tax reductions, subsidies and deregulation which makes it easier to throw more of the working class, like ourselves, onto the welfare payroll. The sales tax hikes were sold as a way to offset the rising costs of welfare expenditures especially due to the baby-boomers retiring and the effects of the decreasing birthrate, not for corporate hand-outs or reducing debt which some have misguidedly reported.

I get nothing for me for going out to work

What do you expect? A red carpet and fanfare by the government because you are capable of taking care of your own family?

Anything we have, we worked for and have paid in far more than we have ever got from the government.

Just like most people at working age. I wonder what you will say when you start receiving a pension after you reach retirement age.

The baby boomers we are paying for made a fortune during the boom of the 80s, while we struggle to buy our own house.

Having in mind the prices of the real estate during the bubble period, I would not say that they could save much of the money they made. You think that you are the only one who works hard and struggles to get through life? Guess what? Millions are like you and while life is no easier for them, most of them possess the degree of practicality necessary to acknowledge other people's efforts and struggles (regardless of them being past or present)

I know some one who is paying 15,000yen a month into one, expecting to get 40,000yen a month when they retire.

They are probably paying "kokumin-nenkin" in which case they will receive around 70,000 yen a month after paying for 40 years.

And that leaves a balance one yen.

Schopenhauer raises an important point.

The cost to the hospital of charging the patient and processing the paperwork far exceeds the income from the actual charges.

And think of the economic cost of working patients having to hang around after treatment to pay these fees.

It's self-serving and (as too often) not self-funding - bureaucratic onanism par excellence.

Good points by Cleo, but we need to know what "healthcare" means. If it means building hospitals and social welfare centers that have no funds to run in the black, then it's just camouflaged public works spending in an already over-infrastructured country.

I guess you would not want a pension as you would have saved your money by not sending your kids to college

And further down the line the kids who missed out on a college education because their fiscally-responsible parents wanted the money for their own retirement will need the public pension because the low-paying unskilled work that was all they were qualified for won't be enough to live on, never mind save for retirement out of.

Taking out private insurance for one retirement is always going to be fraught with risk, the most obvious drawback, your pension fund performance may not have grown in value as much as you had anticipated, which unfortunately relying on market forces. I chose to invest directly in businesses and property and persuaded associate individual investors to join me.

If PAYE tax payers have paid national insurance for their future financial wellbeing in retirement over a lifetime, it is unthinkable to betray there expediency and trust. We have to cough up through our taxes to make good on the deal, them are the rules. Government ministries need to realise fully the huge responsibility they have ensuring the nation's economy is balanced and managed efficiently.

"The very first paragraph mentions to help citizens in its rapidly ageing society. That means pensioners, and babies. Maybe you wouldn't have missed it if you'd taken that minute to read the article. There is no mention of giving money to people to spend on cigarettes, alcohol and pachinko. ".¡I'm agree!. I can't understand comments against this public policy.Japan,throufh government,must support those families.

another 3.4 trillion yen will help to lower out-of-pocket costs for the elderly who often require expensive healthcare

The elderly as a segment of society have 900 trillion yen's worth of financial assets. The average over-65 has 20,000,000 yen of savings to their name (and owns their own home 90% of the time). The elderly generation has more than enough financial assets to look after itself.

It doesn't make sense for the extra consumption tax (collected from young and old alike) to go towards further elderly health care.

Schopenhauer,

I tend to agree. People go to the doctor for the smallest of ailments, but if they knew the total cost of the service they were receiving and considered if it were really worth it, I think medical costs could easily be knocked down 5 or 10%. That and making those who can afford it pay a fairer share.

@LaWren: "Given very high public debt, implementation of the second consumption tax increase is critical to establish a track record of fiscal discipline" - that was from the IMF last October. "Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe proceeded with an April sales-tax increase and a 5 trillion yen ($51 billion) stimulus plan as he tries to rein in the world’s biggest debt burden without negating efforts to end deflation." That was Bloomburg last October

You cited IMF and Bloomberg, both of which are not governmental organizations. Their “interpretations”, however, do not contradict what Abe’s government said when they defended the tax increase.

As stranger and Cleo said, the government (I do not remember whether it was Abe himself either) sold it exactly as a means to top up the pool for pensions and family allowances for families with babies.

He sold that tax increase as necessary to make a dent in the huge public debt, not to fund welfare.

Spending for welfare state items like childcare and pensions is probably the most obvious consumption expenditure of the government. The government spends the money it taxes on governmental projects, which in most if not all developed countries, include welfare. The welfare spending in Japan is expected to grow as the number of retirees grows and the government tries to provide some new financial stimuli for families with young children. The 3% and later 5% consumption tax increase will support governmental spending on welfare thus (hopefully) help to curb the national debt.

People have to pay more to doctors and hospitals. while this is probably unavoidable, good affordable medical treatment should be available for all citizens, not just the rich.

LaWren Jan. 14, 2015 - 01:15PM JST

I am the working wife, Mr. Perfect. There was no tree this year, and very few gifts, and no otoshidama. The kids are adequately fed and clothed and health care is covered. I didnt have to work until recently, and I get nothing for me for going out to work, just keeping our heads above water. I work part time, soon to be full time in order to cover rising costs. Anything we have, we worked for and have paid in far more than we have ever got from the government.

The baby boomers we are paying for made a fortune during the boom of the 80s, while we struggle to buy our own house. If they spent and didn't save, well more fool them, I dont see why the average tax payer has to fund their greed.

Mrs. LaWren, I truly can understand and sympathize with your situation and mostly agree with the above. However, I know many pensioners, some personally that are having a rough time as they were blue collar and brought up families as your yourself described. They scrape by and only buy foods that are discounted and often go without.

I think that this plan by Abe and team is nothing more than an attempt to give the working and non-working poor a sugar placebo to give the impression that this administration is looking out for them! The last 3.12 trillion yen supplementary budget was just to grease the pockets and coffers of local governments with nearly no conditions or oversight as to how the money has to be spent.

There are not enough jobs for graduates of academic courses. Not everyone can be, or can afford to train to be a lawyer or an accountant, or the ubiquitous journalist. Not going to university does not mean poverty nor low laying jobs, it does mean learning a skill and getting out there earning. Of course the snobs who use government money to subsidize the aspirations of their children would look down on an electrician, a mechanic or a tattoo artist, but these are perfectly respectable professions and ones which can support a person financially.

If my kids are clever enough to get a scholarship, or dedicated to a subject enough to understand the most I could do is help with living costs, then good for them. Unfortunately poor health and a poor economy can hit a family hard, and aspirations have to be adjusted accordingly.

Y6.4 trillion out of Y8 trillion raised by increasing the consumption tax goes to the elderly, LDP voters. Abe knows how to keep his electorate happy.

LaWren Jan. 14, 2015 - 08:59AM JST

If people haven't saved for their old age, that is their look out, why should my working family support people who have been irresponsible?

Sounds like you are one of the lucky ones here in Japan who has a full-time job with paid holidays and are enrolled in the Social Insurance System (社会保険, Shakai Hoken), including health insurance, employee pension, unemployment insurance, and workers' accident compensation insurance.

How unfortunate for those selfish idiots who weren't, for whatever reason, able to land a full-time job. I guess you will argue that it was their choice and they could have gotten one had they scored higher in their university entrance exams or were born with a silver spoon in their mouths!

Well, so much for using the tax to reduce the public debt.

Um, what about increasing maternity support, it is way too expensive in this country.

it is a little bit of sales tax but it helps a lot. not a bad deal for Japanese folks.

Hey Mr Perfect, I worked very hard for everything I have and I dont have much. No silver spoon here, yes I have a degree, and I worked and paid for that too. Japan's rich pensioners do not need to take any more tax money from my family. No paid holidays here, and unpaid overtime is the norm for our family. We work very hard, for a very poor quality of life in Japan, and the tax increases caused a real dent in our day to day finances.

Really, I have problem to follow this Prime Minister who is spending more time to amend constitution and register secrecy topics one after one in a few months than execute what he has been mandated for.

The average over-65 has 20,000,000 yen of savings to their name (and owns their own home 90% of the time).

I'd like to know where your figures come from.

Averages don't really mean anything; if my feet are in a bucket of ice and my hair is on fire, on average I'm at a comfortable temperature.

making those who can afford it pay a fairer share

You do know that those with higher incomes do pay a higher premium?

The old rich pensioners should be means tested before receiving the pension

Means testing isn't necessarily fair. If two people have the same job, same income, one person lives frugally and saves for retirement while the other spends all the money on the good life, by the time they retire, by your logic, the careful saver should do the best he can with what he saved, while the now-penniless spendthrift deserves a pension from the public purse.

If people haven't saved for their old age, that is their look out

So people decide not to have kids, because kids are expensive and they need to save for their old age. That means still fewer future taxpayers, in a downward spiral. People will be much more willing to have kids (which the government says it wants to encourage) if they can be confident of a living pension after they've spent everything on putting their kids through college.

Nessie - Yes indeed.

by all means continue to sell out the youth for cash now and then be congratulated with even faster decline in birth rate and even more pensioners needing their money to live

Or immigration.

It's not like Japan doesn't have choices but it continues to avoid immigration even if it means the continued decline of Japan. Sorry to see.

This culminates in the term 'hafu' which is short of half-breed, something no one in English would ever say today. Japan just refuses to change racial opinions or social or monetary. It's quite remarkable. But this is their choice and their voters have decided to do this.

cleo,

My figures are from the government. Actually my average number was low, it's apparently 23,050,000 yen. http://www.stat.go.jp/info/guide/asu/2011/09.htm

What the 23 million yen average savings in elderly households shows is that there is plenty of money within that elderly generation to tap, before putting yet further burden on the younger generation, who we recognise struggles to afford to raise kids in this country. Millionaire pensioners don't need financial assistance from younger residents of Japan who have no savings and no home to his / her name. And the per capita number of elderly the workers are having to support is increasing - there's an inter-generational unfairness there.

The system should be overhauled to correct this, and make it sustainable in view of today's realities.

You make a good point about potential unfairness with means testing. The government needs to ensure the right incentives are in place to encourage "good" behaviour, but at least in Japan people do have a penchant for saving when they have the means to do so.

"then do they really need the pension from the govt ?"

Well, they paid for it. It's contributory based, like an insurance plan.

Well, they paid for it.

Sad to say, but they didn't.

Of course they did. Apart from the free-loader sengyoshufu who get a pension without paying in a red yen.

The baby boomers we are paying for made a fortune during the boom of the 80s, while we struggle to buy our own house.

Some folk maybe made their fortunes during the boom, but remember for ordinary folk prices were commensurably high. It will take us 30 years to pay off our pretty steep mortgage (which I don't regret at all - we wanted our kids to grow up in a decent house with a garden and a dog), while my daughter's house - bigger, nicer, newer, more modern than ours - cost them less than half what ours did. They complain about the monthly mortgage payments, but it's peanuts compared to what we paid.

If they spent and didn't save, well more fool them

Yeah, more fool us for giving our kids a good life and putting them through college.

people who chose to use their money to send kids to college

That's an interesting perspective, one that had never occurred to me. You see, I always thought that having kids meant you did your very best for them no matter what, not that you let them have some of the scraps left after you'd made sure of your own needs. And if there were no scraps left, tuff luck kids, no education for you. Different ideas of what it means to be a parent, I guess.

...and then rely on a government pension paid out of my taxes....

A part-timer, telling me how much her taxes will support my pension...? That's really quite funny. If your husband is a sarariman, you realise that you are the one whose free pension will have been paid for out of public taxes, including mine and my kids'?

No, but people who chose to use their money to send kids to college and then rely on a government pension paid out of my taxes, should not be mollycoddled with increased payments by Abe. I would love to be able to afford to send mine, but I cannot, and will not unless I leave myself without savings for old age.

That's really an interesting argument. Because it seems that kids with college education have more and better job opportunities than those without one and are more likely to contribute to the social insurance system after they start working. With this in mind, we can assume that the kids whose parents decided to give them a better start in life by sending them to college will one day be paying taxes to support your pension. But I guess you would not want a pension as you would have saved your money by not sending your kids to college.

"Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s government expects an additional 8 trillion yen in tax revenue for the next fiscal year after raising the nationwide sales tax to 8% from 5% in April 2014."

Is the gov't actually going to get the additional 8 trillion yen, being as how consumption is way down? I doubt it.

The old rich pensioners should be means tested before receiving the pension, if they are creaming it off the stock market, have a second home down in Izu, travel to Hawaii and drive a benz then do they really need the pension from the govt ?

They are trying this with US Social Security and I say no! The money is taken out by law and you have no say in what amount is taken out. So, if you work your entire life, and manage to make something of yourself or save enough to where you don't need the governments assistance when you retire, that is good for you. You made the sacrifices and it paid off for you. The government has no right to now come and say that "we took this from you with the promise to hold it for you, now that you did better than we expected, we are not going to give you back the amount we promised." That is robbery pure and simple.

That's why I say time to privatize these systems. If they were to tell me, that we see you have made such amount and you have points to retire, then tell me up front and I can decide if I want you to keep taking the money out of my "suppposed retirement account" and let me do with it as I want or you just keep taking away and then telling me, so sorry we overspent so you need to make it up.

If they take it out, and promise to pay you back a certain amount, then they must regardless of how much you may have managed to save on your own.

fxgai

What the graph on the page you linked to shows is that more than half of all elderly households (with 2 or more people, singles don't seem to be included) have savings of less than 15 million yen, and two-thirds have less than the average 23 million. Just a quarter have savings in excess of 30 million yen.

The page also shows a shortfall between average income and expenditure of nearly 50 thousand a month. If the average oldie makes up that difference from his average savings, the pot runs out in approximately 25 years. Looks like the oldies had better not look forward to a long old age.

@sf2k: by all means continue to sell out the youth for cash now

Can't see your logic. The increased consumption tax is paid by both young and old, with the number of the elderly growing every year (the elderly will constitute 28% of the Japanese society quite soon) so it is not a burden on the young people only. Also, as pointed by the government itself and many postes above, part of the collected tax will be spent on childcare and families with young children.

Eventually, despite the painful process, the decrease in population in the long term is probably not such a bad thing. Japan is overpopulated anyway and its land cannot support the population as it is at present.

I am the working wife, Mr. Perfect. There was no tree this year, and very few gifts, and no otoshidama. The kids are adequately fed and clothed and health care is covered. I didnt have to work until recently, and I get nothing for me for going out to work, just keeping our heads above water. I work part time, soon to be full time in order to cover rising costs. Anything we have, we worked for and have paid in far more than we have ever got from the government.

The baby boomers we are paying for made a fortune during the boom of the 80s, while we struggle to buy our own house. If they spent and didn't save, well more fool them, I dont see why the average tax payer has to fund their greed.

Well, they paid for it.

Sad to say, but they didn't. Japan's started out as a funded system in the old days, but it has been a pay as you go system for years now. A lot of people don't seem to realise this.

"and then rely on a government pension paid out of my taxes,"

When the govt pays pensions, it presses a button, which sends an electronic transfer to your account. It doesnt have to earn or save any equivalent money from a fund, because the govt IS the issuer of said money. That's one way how yen enters circulation.

Pensions would only be paid "out of my taxes" if bad/ignorant politicians and civil servants are in charge of this process.

cleo,

What the graph on the page you linked to shows is that more than half of all elderly households (with 2 or more people, singles don't seem to be included) have savings of less than 15 million yen, and two-thirds have less than the average 23 million. Just a quarter have savings in excess of 30 million yen.

So?

The point is that the elderly generation has tonnes of cash. If there are poor elderly who need assistance, it should be coming from their rich peers, rather than their (on average) poorer children's generation.

The page also shows a shortfall between average income and expenditure of nearly 50 thousand a month. If the average oldie makes up that difference from his average savings, the pot runs out in approximately 25 years. Looks like the oldies had better not look forward to a long old age.

Or they might have to play a little less golf, and work a little longer.

I thought Shinzo Abe said economy is his number one priority. I don't see how this policy will help the economy. Also, the details of how he will use the money are too vague. It's like when all that money was earmarked for relief after Fukushima, but somehow ended up in the hands of enterprising contractors.

LaWren: at the personal level, yes of course it's personal choice; and the majority of people make the choice not to have children they feel they can't afford. But the topic is government policy, and the government wants people to have more babies. The government (LDP) is also strongly supported by the older generation, who are not going to vote for lower pensions or more expensive healthcare.

Complete financial and economic illiteracy going on here. Raising the consumption tax rate does not raise a single extra yen in tax revenue. It just speeds up the collection. Only question is if those in charge are incompetents who don't know that, or if they know exactly what they are doing.

No, but people who chose to use their money to send kids to college and then rely on a government pension paid out of my taxes, should not be mollycoddled with increased payments by Abe. I would love to be able to afford to send mine, but I cannot, and will not unless I leave myself without savings for old age.

All those pension schemes are flawed, they are more scams than schemes, they all need to be overhauled. Just great ponzi schemes on another dimension.

These people who are claiming the pension get paid more each month than they paid in each month.

The plan was initially built with the idea that most would die early than they are now days, with good health care science etc people are living longer than previous generations.

I know some one who is paying 15,000yen a month into one, expecting to get 40,000yen a month when they retire.

Depending on how long they live for someone is going to get short changed, either them or the govt. If they live long in their retirement they might get close to breaking even or coming out ahead, if they die early the govt comes out ahead.

That's how they operate kinda betting most will die early, ie accidents, poor health etc, most don't live long after 80 or so. So retire at 65 collect the pension for say 15 years after paying in for 45 years..................................

The government must reduce medical expenses. People have to pay more to doctors and hospitals. I went to a medical college hospital in Tokyo the other day and paid less than one hundred yen while it costed me 1,000 yen for transportation. This is ridiculous.

Schopenhauer,

I totally agree!! Why should I, a healthy person have to help pay for sick people? They should pay their own way! Americanised Health Care for all! Health Care for only those who can afford it! Health Care is a privilege, not a right!

He sold that tax increase as necessary to make a dent in the huge public debt, not to fund welfare. If people haven't saved for their old age, that is their look out, why should my working family support people who have been irresponsible? If I had been financially irresponsible I would not expect a single yen from the government. There is no need for anyone to claim welfare apart from the sick who cannot work.

Wait a minute! Let me get something straight here. They want to use Harding working taxpayers money to financially support lazy a** people who spend the money on cigarettes, alcohol and pachinko and not put the money into the pension system? What did i miss?