politics

Japan to increase 5-year budget for hosting U.S. troops to ¥1.05 tril

46 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

46 Comments
Login to comment

211 billion yen per fiscal year

5 years ago only cost 190 billion yen, now it become 211 billion which mean 51 billion yen extra each year for next five year. Japan must be having a good economy recently also need to thank to all tax payer in Japan.

https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20160530/p2a/00m/0na/017000c

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Although japan's economy was fragile after WWII and the fact that the US helped japan out by importing inferior goods from japan to help boost japan's economy, the japanese should have wisely started taxing its citizens to help pay for various government spending such as milirary/defense, but no, they didn't. There was no consumption tax on anything up until about 25 years ago and it's been drastically increasing since.

Typical. No foresight. Typical. Oh, so typical.

And now they whine about it and oh so typically try to blame shift.

Oh, so typical.

-14 ( +6 / -20 )

The japanese should have wisely started taxing its citizens to help pay for various government spending such as milirary/defense, but no, they didn't. here was no consumption tax on anything up until about 25 years ago and it's been drastically increasing since.

Because tax is not only consumption tax, there is income tax, corporation tax, capital gain tax, inheritance tax (death tax)

https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-tax-report-international/japan-tax-revenue-hits-a-record-60-8t-yen-despite-pandemic

5 ( +7 / -2 )

It would be less costly for Japan to develop its own nuclear weapons to protect itself from the aggressive neighbors than keep hosting the cash hog.

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

It would be less costly for Japan to develop its own nuclear weapons to protect itself from the aggressive neighbors than keep hosting the cash hog.

What aggressive neighbours? All the rhetoric regarding aggression by neighbours seems to come from Japan.

-10 ( +11 / -21 )

When at least 4 of your neighbors hate you - and some threaten to destroy you - this is money well spent, and unavoidable.

-1 ( +15 / -16 )

There is no problem in Japan's immediate area that couldn't be solved with REAL diplomacy and therein lies the problem.

Elite Todai graduates who care more about agreement with the status quo, their own personal standard of living and possessions couldn't give a flying whatsit for the feelings and situations of the countries around them.

I don't refer to them as politicians because they aren’t. They are a bunch of spoiled complacent idiots who talk a lot but don't actually DO anything.

8 ( +18 / -10 )

What’s often not mentioned is that most of this money goes to land leases for base real estate.

The whole Henoko/Futenma fiasco is a result of Futenma land owners not wanting to give up the sweet sweet Uncle Sam dollars, and delaying the relocation process by all means possible.

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Also, subsidized housing is way overcharged by local realtors.

Let’s say the housing bonus for a Navy officer in Yokosuka is $4,000 max. The real estate agents know this, and will charge something like $3,000 for a “manshon” that is half the price on the regular market.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Bad news for a good news day.

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

pure money waste.

for own occupation by foreign boots.

just one question-why Japan need SDF than?what for?

0 ( +7 / -7 )

Its interesting because while Japan pays the US to host its military forces, the US foots the bill when it comes to aiding countries in the Middle East, like Israel ($3.8 billion per year). I think Japan needs to build up its lobbying efforts in DC. Perhaps an AJPAC is needed.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

That isn’t isn’t that much money in the grand scheme of things. There is a lot of Japanese construction and employment that’s comes with it.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

Politicians waste to much tax payers money with American troops.

8 ( +14 / -6 )

Stop buying useless weapons from Uncle Sam, at the end of the day nukes are much cheaper.

Stop being the Washington DC cash dispenser!

5 ( +10 / -5 )

211 billion yen a year is about the cost for one Arleigh Burke destroyer. US$1.843 billion per ship (DDG 114–116, FY2011/12)

So you get a US battle group on call with all associated equipment, spares, troops, training ammunition and upgrades for the equivalent cost of one destroyer. I would call that a bargain.

As long as they stay. If they were leaving in five years I would rather have five additional destroyers. But they will stay and it will keep being worth the cost for the benefit gained. Considering a large chunck of the money will return to the Japanese tax payer the value is even better.

If I could get the same benefits for my country I would line up for that.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

Stop buying useless weapons from Uncle Sam

erm… the only weapons Japan is buying from Uncle Sam are the Remington M700 sniper rifles and F-35s. And both are far from useless.

Japan’s F-15s are made in Japan by Mitsubishi and IHI under license.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Hosting? That's a quaint term for an army of occupation in place over a term of 75 years.

The belligerent rhetoric from LDP and other right-wing, reactionary, paleo-conservatives has no foundation in reality. China has not threatened Japan. Why would it want to reduce market share with a primary outlet for goods and manufacturing and reduce profit. China has already won economically. No need to blow-up the world, which seems a US strategy.

The supposed threats: North Korea, China, Russia:

North Korea is a Third World impoverished country with a rag-tag army that lacks resources for any manner sustained mechanized warfare and has no navy or air force worth doodle-squat.

China which produces a majority goods for the West, Japan and Asia has no need to engage in warfare to extend its economic power - let alone that almost every major international corporation has offices and production facilities in China. Very large concerns located in Taiwan profit handsomely from their facilities located on the mainland. China has no need to engage in military altercations - the desire for such emanates from an American Empire in decline and has no other stratagem, except the 'threat' of so-called 'military might'.

Russia faces west towards Europe and has absolutely no intention of 'invading' Japan. Russia is threatened by NATO, which is a tool of the USA.

The military bases, funded in part by Japan is a ludicrous endeavor. Japanese politicians & profiteers who seem to embrace the client-state relation suffer from numerous illusions and have inflicted such upon the citizenry. Japan is the far edge of American Empire, along with South Korea.

As would be apparent if fully examined: the US Troops stationed in Japan are incapable of responding to an invasion of, say, Taiwan - the numbers are too small and transport is limited. And, in fact, there are 30,000 troops stationed in South Korea. For those geographically challenged, South Korea abuts North Korea and is closer to China than Japan.

Let's see: 50,000 US troops in Japan. China: 1,000,000.

6 ( +14 / -8 )

here was no consumption tax on anything up until about 25 years ago

The consumption tax replaced the commodity tax (物品税). A rose by any other name.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Let's see: 50,000 US troops in Japan.

China: 1,000,000.

And China only has the air and sealift capacity to transport 20,000 or so at a time. Half those would never even reach Japanese/Taiwanese shores before being made into crab bait.

And if China even scratches a single US Marine, Sailor, Airman or Soldier on their joyride to Japan/Taiwan, the US will respond in such a manner that the “Shock and Awe” of Iraq War part II would look like mild restraint.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Soft! Stop kow towing to the US and stand up for your selves!

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

Japan just make a Nuke n peace will b there from every corner n no need to pay For security Nuke is the security

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Isn't it amazing that the great Japanese people agree to pay for the army that occupies their country & whose soldiers have committed a lot of crimes against innocent Japanese citizens?

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Isn't it amazing that the great Japanese people agree to pay for the army that occupies their country & whose soldiers have committed a lot of crimes against innocent Japanese citizens?

isn't it amazing that the great Japanese people agree to pay partial costs of the allied army that is based in Japan and who's soldiers are committed to defend Japan and it's citizens if it is attacked?

Pretty amazing.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

¥1688 per person per year is the cost of this expenditure. An increase of 5%. If my wage increased 5% or my taxes decreased by 5%, I’d be fine with it. Otherwise the LDP can screw off.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Japan has paid for decades for this bases. Long before S. Korea ever did Samit. If you want to judge Japan you should judge S. Korea too who refuses to pay more for USA bases and also has problems against them.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Peter14

Quote 211 billion yen a year is about the cost for one Arleigh Burke destroyer. US$1.843 billion per ship (DDG 114–116, FY2011/12)

You forget to count the cost of Plaza Accord. How much money did Japan lose because USA wanted a better deal for its country. Used the defense of Japan as bargaining tool to force us to sign that disaster.

If USA starts WW3 with China and Russia Expectations are full Japanese support, the Shield who will take all the missiles and bombs that cant reach USA land, but will reach Japan.

Your calculations is always from USA point of view, always ignore everything else Japan does in support of America while also being hold back and crippled by USA.

Go ask S. Korea for my support. They refuse to counter China or Russia and wants nothing to do with Taiwan defense.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

American forces in Japan are regarded as an Occupation Force, so why do we pay to have them here?

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

To give 1.05 trillion yen over the next five years (annually, 211 billion yen) to the U.S. for its deployment of 56,118 troops to Japan? At heart, Washington must be very thankful to China for giving a nice pretext in its demand for the increase of the "sympathy budget".  For,  under Article 24 of the SOFA, Japan has no obligation to bear the cost of the U.S. military presence in Japan.

The fact that the U.S. can disregard such agreements tells more than enough that bilateral agreements such as SOFA and Japan-U.S. Security Treaty are nothing but shams.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

To give 1.05 trillion yen over the next five years (annually, 211 billion yen) to the U.S. for its deployment of 56,118 troops to Japan? 

The money isn’t just being “given” to the US. Most of it goes to paying leases for the bases, and hiring local workers. Most of the money never leaves Japan, and Japan gets a forward deployed force for a fraction of the cost than building its own.

2billion dollars annual for a carrier strike group, submarine fleet, two tactical air wings, two fighter air wings, a Marine Expeditionary Force, and Army support group is a bargain by any standard.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

FYI, Article XXIV of SOFA stipulates the U.S. will bear all expenditures necessary to maintain its forces in Japan. In light of this, then, on what legal basis do Japanese taxpayers including Okinawa residents have to pay 1.05 trillion yen over the next five years to have the U.S. forces stationed in Japan?

More specifically, Article 24 of the said agreement says: "It is agreed that the United States will bear for the duration of this Agreement without cost to Japan all expenditures incident to the maintenance of the United States armed forces in Japan except those to be borne by Japan as provided in paragraph 2. The Japanese side faithfully abides by paragraph 2 of Article XXIV , that is stipulated as follows:

(2) It is agreed that Japan will furnish for the duration of this Agreement without cost to the United States and make compensation where appropriate to the owners and suppliers thereof all facilities and areas and rights of way, including facilities and areas jointly used such as those at airfields and ports, as provided in Articles II and III.

Such stupid measure are possible only between countries in victor-loser relationship. In other words, Japan, and Okinawa in particular, is definitely still under U.S. military occupation, that has been going on since 1945.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

You just answered your own question in paragraph 2.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

BeerDeliveryGuy,

My understanding of Paragraph 2 is that Japan must pay rents to land owners, and probably compensations for damages incurred in bases exclusively used by U.S. forces or jointly used with JSDF. Who wrote the English, which is so awkward?

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Shouldn't the US be paying for all of that in return for its position in global hegemony?

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Another problem I want to take issue with here is on what legal basis Japan has to shoulder the construction cost of the Henoko new base which is estimated by Okinawa Prefectural Government to amount to a total 2.65 trillion yen.

Article 24 of SOFA doesn't say anything about it at all. A Defense bureaucrat couldn't answer it clearly during a Dietary session except mumbling that Japan is shouldering it just because. Such is the fact about the Japan-U.S. relationship and alliance!

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

No USA No War or make Nukes to deter Wars

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

American forces in Japan are regarded as an Occupation Force

No, they are not. Of course China and Russia like nothing more than to say such things because having US forces so close by limits their ability to expand their territories as they desire.

Occupation forces means no Japanese embassies anywhere in the world as all things must go through the occupiers embassies. No membership in the UN or world bodies as the occupier speaks for the occupied in all things.

Japan has a strong ally that has military bases in Japan. Russia and China do not like that so lets just call them occupying forces. It is no surprise that some in Japan would rather no US bases in Japan. Some Americans would also prefer not to have US forces protecting Japan. Always there is two sides to every coin.

Simply lying and calling the US occupiers is factually wrong. The world knows this. Why bother lying?

Just tell the truth, that you dont like them being there. When you add a lie to your opinion, it just devalues your opinion.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

EastmanDec. 21  09:55 am JST

pure money waste.

for own occupation by foreign boots.

just one question-why Japan need SDF than?what for?

The JSDF is Japan's first line of defense, be it invasion, attack or simply affirming it's territorial rights. The JSDF is purely defensive whereas the US forces are not constitionally handtied. In addition, any country that does attack Japan will be engaging the United States in a war per Article 5 of the US-JPN security treaty. But perhaps most importantly, it allows Japan to remain a non-nuclear nation, but at the same time ensuring that any nuclear attack on Japan would receive a nuclear retaliation. It's really not all that hard to figure out.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

@sakurasuki, "5 years ago only cost 190 billion yen, now it become 211 billion which mean 51 billion yen extra each year for next five year."

Yes, but what was the yen rate 5 years ago. A weaker yen (today is about 114.5 yen per dollar) means that 10% increase from the amount five years ago is largely swallowed by the exchange rate differential. So the USA will perceive no extra increase in the subsidy.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Everything related with the Japan-U.S. military alliance seems to be carried out just because with no legal footing. The Futenma relocation issue is one in point. The land on which Futenma sits was confiscated illegally in violation of international law. Futenma is an illegal property per se whereby the U.S. can't demand a replacement be provided in exchange of its return.

The so-called "sympathy budget", which the U.S. side euphemistically calls "host-nation support", is another. There's no legal basis for Japanese taxpayers to shoulder such expenditures. But Tokyo promised to pay 1.05 trillion yen over the next five years (annually, 211 billion yen). Some poster says the money is paid to Japanese base workers for their salaries and Japanese companies that are commissioned for repairs and maintenance of the bases so that it's not the same as giving money to the U.S.

If that logic stand, then Japanese companies operating in the U.S. can demand that labor and material costs be borne by the U.S. government because the money will eventually return to U.S. economy.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

P. Smith,

A bargain for what Japan receives.

A bargain for what Japan receives?! To me, it looks like an extortion of money by the U.S. 

Fighto!,

In your opinion, who are Japan's four neighbors that hate and threaten Japan? Are they Russia, China and North Korea? What is the fourth neighbor? South Korea?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I remember a weekly magazine article in the 1970s reporting that the Pentagon initiated a study to investigate why historical empires had fallen. Its conclusion was that they expanded their borders too far and wide, and along with it bloated their defense budgets exceedingly.

The reason why a war department like the Pentagon engaged in such an academic study soon became clear. The U.S. began asking U.S. base-planted countries to increase their share of base maintenance costs such as for labor and utilities, calling these countries "host nations" and the expenses "host-nation support".

Japan's sharing ratio of "host-nation support" is conspicuous among other U.S. allies: 74.5%. Compare this percentage with the UK's (27.1% ) and South Korea's (40%).

The agreement this time around includes an eye-catching new item, i.e. a procurement cost of training materials (cannonballs and eventually missiles?) in addition to transportation expenses for training troops.

What a world!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites