|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- DEPART REENTER DEPART
REENTER DEPART
- By:John S. Davis
- The UMJ Volume 4.1 Re-entry Special (Editorial)
- By:John S. Davis
- Sad to say, so many of us who have lived in Japan
for years and years like nothing more than to leave, for shorter
or longer periods of time, and the feeling at departure is so
much more joyful than the feeling on reentry. How happy! How
lucky! We are leaving!
But then we remember we have forgotten to get our reentry permit!- How dare they dampen our spirits with such nonsense! Who could blame anyone for complaining? The criminals among us are probably not coming back anyway, at least if they have already made a good take. It is us innocent souls that suddenly have to feel like
criminals.- If it happens to you, too, people, even just before the passport stamper at the airport, don't falter-just march over to a side window, tell the man (or, recently, possibly even a woman!?) your dilemma, but with an appropriate amount of panic, despair and regret in your voice. They will give you a re-entry permit on the spot if necessary, however grudgingly. Beg even for a multiple re-entry permit if that is what you want. You have the right, at least to beg!! You are paying the man's (or woman's) salary, after all, if you are paying your taxes. They have to listen to you!
- They may not be so nice, though. How could they be? If the word got out, they would be flooded with such requests and people wouldn't be able to make their flights.
- But it makes no sense to harp on a problem without offering a solution.
- The American Chamber of Commerce in Japan (ACCJ) recently issued a statement on the issue (ACCJ Viewpoint of 4/10/99) and they are not a bunch of wimps when it comes to lobbying. In fact, no doubt it was partially, if not largely, their effort that saved the Americans working in Japan from losing their living-in-Japan-tax-deduction when changes were being made in the US tax laws. And many of the reductions in Japans non-tariff trade barriers were made possible through their efforts. So LET US PRAY!
- I would like to quote their statement in its entirety, but to do so would require their permission. Therefore, please access their site and read it for yourself. It requires registration, but that is free and quick, as you need only to complete an on-line form, on line.
The web site address is: http://www.accj.or.jp/- In sum, ACCJ wisely does not insist that the Ministry of Justice lose the fees for re-entry permits which is one of their sources of income. That part of the decision, the ministry can decide for itself. It suggests only that the re-entry permits be valid and timed according the period of stay and charged proportionately accordingly. Thus, if the period of stay is one year from x date to y date, the re-entry permit would also be from x date to y date and the fee would be for a one re-entry permit valid for one year. And if the period of stay were three years, the permit would be for three years and would cost a proportionately greater amount. The maximum permit would be for three years and the maximum length of stay outside of the country for a reentry permit to be valid would be one year. This would prevent permanent residents from obtaining a 50 year permit, although I don't know why it should be prevented unless there is some anxiety that inflation may cause the Ministry to lose in the end (Sort of like some US magazines in the l940's lost when they sold life-time subscriptions for $100.00).
- One of the advantages of the changes would be much less inconvenience for the foreigners, of course, but that would not be enough of a reason to move the Ministry of Justice (or any government agency in the world, for that matter) to do anything. What should have an appeal is the other advantage; namely, a reduction of the burden on the immigration bureau without any loss of revenue for the Ministry of Justice. However, the cynic among us might point out that reduction in load ultimately means downsizing and given the general anxiety many of us have about down-sizing, the government ministry is likely no exception.
- Therefore, I would suggest that the appeal needs to be directed to the DIET as well as to the Ministry of Justice. It is the DIET that is or should be concerned with reducing the tax burden on the populace through downsizing the government bureaucracy. Sadly, however, unless something really has changed, any legislation affecting the Ministry of Justice would probably have to be drafted by the Ministry of Justice officials themselves-they did not go to Tokyo University for nothing! In Japan, it is the politicians who are the real wimps. Like a bunch of scared rabbits, they wimp out almost every time.
- johnsdavis@hotmail.com
|
|
|
|
