Since they don't give you a residence card, I wonder how easy it would be to get a phone number and bank account. If some government officials didn't get information on this visa, how can we expect companies to have? They will look at your passport with dead eyes and think you are fooling them with a fake stamp.
I'm very interested in applying for that visa, but not being in the Japanese system (e.g. no health insurance, no residence card) is kind of putting me off because that spells more administrative nonsense.
If you need health care it would definitely be a hassle at least if you don't have a lot of spare cash--you'd have to see if the mandatory travel insurance you purchased has some sort of direct payment arrangement with selected clinics. But it shouldn't be any issue to just receive the service and pay the full cash price, again same as a tourist.
The real issue is going to be a bank account, which would primarily be needed if you tried to rent a "regular" apartment. The best workaround might be to see if the owner would take cash, up front if needed. You'd be within the "treated as nonresident" period at first anyway, so it would already be hard to get an account even with a residence card. If you don't need it for rent/utilities (ex. share house that takes online payments, hotel/airbnb, etc.) then you probably wouldn't want the hassle of opening and closing a local bank account anyway.
I use one called safetywing, though thankfully have never had to claim and don't know if they are better or worse than their competitors. (posted as an example and not a recommendation or endorsement)
But JPY is quite popular; I have just checked that Raiffeisen Bank in Russia still allows selecting it online as a currency for a foreign transfer. It's too bad I won't be able to do the same online from my Metrobank account in the Philippines.
They don't? Then what use is the visa? You cannot live here without a residence card. As a non-citizen, you're actually legally required to carry your residence card with you whenever you're in public, and present it to a police officer upon request.
Something doesn't seem right here.
Edit: apparently you can live here, without a residence card, in a temporary apartment, for up to 6 months with this visa. Just be sure to carry your passport everywhere you go.
It's not going to help them find a place to live though: they'll be stuck in hotels the entire time they're here.
People who come here with the intention of milking some cash and living in a "cheap" country have even less reason to be loyal to it. The consequence will be companies being even stricter, but parasites like AirBnB and similar companies making a killing off offering apartments 5x above normal asking price to rich nomads who will say "wow, it's so cheap!" without realizing they're being ripped off, and killing neighborhoods by driving rent prices up. Owners of multiple homes stand to gain, but typical companies have been doing the math for a long time and see nothing but losses. The general sentiment by locals towards this policy has been "So we're really becoming like Vietnam and Thailand, huh?", so the vast majority of people will not be welcoming nomads with open arms, or at all. There's already massive controversy over new apartments being bought up by foreign investors and locals being pushed farther out of Tokyo.
People can downvote because they don't like hearing this. But it's the state of things here. It's a system forced against the citizens against their will. In a country with a noted history of centuries of distrust of foreigners, this visa scheme is not helping.
The problem isn't signage.
Plus evicting/canceling a contract is an arduous process. It almost always favors the renter. And in the case of actually buying a home, there isn't much anyone can do.
This really sounds like one of those not-quite-racist "problems with foreigners" that every country likes to pretend they have. Every "knows" it's a problem, there's no way to prove it right or wrong, but hey, it gives people something to complain about.
And lumping any sort of economic concerns a country has into racism, then considering it something that shouldn't even be talked about because it's "racism", is how these issues start to snowball fast and more extreme racist reactions grow. A few European countries have taken hard right swings because people who said anything about immigration policies were shut down as racists. Now people don't even care about being called racist because the word is normalized. And that's a dangerous path to have started treading down. Japan is a country where being said to have some prejudice isn't something people will shamefully back away from; things could snowball much faster than in Europe.
It's also common for landlords to ask for higher deposits or months paid up-front.
The parasites in this case are the landlords, not AirBnB. And they're the one driving the rent prices up, not the renters.
Why does everybody refuse to adress the elephant in the room? Because they have parents and uncles who live by exploiting young workers for rent, and don't want to hurt their feelings?
What about considering both as parasites, just different methods for achieving basically the same thing: "More money for me".
Obviously, the landlords are the ones who raise the prices. But I think it'd be ignoring reality if you didn't consider the fact that AirBnb made all of this so much easier and simpler from the landlords. There are platforms that let you sync to many portals, and even see what weeks you should raise the prices to optimize for as much profit as possible. AirBnb and the other platforms are contributing to a constant, collaborative raise of prices.
In fact if they note they can not track exactly how many days you were in and out of the country that is a separate flag, that would likely in most jurisdiction lead to questioning.
(Source: friend had to pull his tickets and explain his travel path, when following unusual route via Schengen in between his entry/exit.)
People underweight how amazing it is to be able to pay less than $50k for the equivalent of a golden visa to a top 5 GDP nation that is well regarded, safe, has some opportunity and is generally easy to live in.
That stability and perception only matters if you _truly_ want to live here, and quite a number of people spend ~3 months here [1] and realize that it's got issues past the honeymoon period (like anywhere else). There's also no reason you can't change your visa type if you find you actually like it after the DN trip.
[1] "here" because I'm back in Japan for a few weeks for friends at the moment, but you get the idea
The Japanese are incredibly racist and xenophobic. Numerous businesses outright place signs barring foreigners (particularly russians, chinese, etc)
Japanese citizens are almost always completely trusted by police over anyone, say, white or black. So Japanese who want to fuck with someone will bait them into a confrontation (or just outright lie) so they're arrested - and Japan has a nearly 100% conviction rate, with the worst prison conditions in the developed world.
I’ve always wondered why countries care about this. If I’m employed in my home country, earning money there and paying taxes, what difference does it make if I happen to sit in another country?
Or if I save up 6 months of PTO, then go to another country for those six months. I’m very much earning money and paying tax in my home country. Why is it ok for me to open my laptop and spend 10 hours a day on random stuff, but not “work stuff”?
Why does "home country" have tax priority over "sitting in" country? How does that make sense vs having the taxes paid in "sitting in" country instead of "home country"?
with perhaps the strongest argument being jurisdiction. What gives "home country" the legal right to claim taxes on income earned in "sitting country"?
and that's where things get complicated. In order to pay taxes in "sitting country" you need a "sitting tax ID number" and other admin, also if the taxes involve wage withholding, who does the withholding and ensures compliance, etc, etc.
How does this align, in the US, with state-level taxes? If you were born in MN and moved to FL, do you pay MN or FL state income taxes (noting that FL does not have state income tax)?
Is "home country" the state with the home office of the company which employs you, or the state you live in? Should employees of a California company pay California state income tax even when working remote from Texas (another no income tax state)? Or the classic Washington/Oregon divide?
Usually a treaty. At least here in Canada the government has tax treaties with most other countries whereby both countries agree the citizen should pay taxes to the country they reside in the majority of the year.
> Paragraph 2 sets forth an exception to the general rule in paragraph 1 that employment income may be taxed in the Contracting State where the employment is exercised. Under paragraph 2, the Contracting State where the employment is exercised may not tax the income from the employment if three conditions are satisfied: (1) the individual is present in the other Contracting State for a period or periods not exceeding 183 days in any 12-month period that begins or ends during the relevant (i.e., the year in which the services are performed) calendar year; (2) the remuneration is paid by, or on behalf of, an employer who is not a resident of that other Contracting State; and (3) the remuneration is not borne by a permanent establishment that the employer has in that other Contracting State. In order for the remuneration to be exempt from tax in the source State, all three conditions must be satisfied. This exception is identical to that set forth in the U.S. and OECD Models.
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-trty/japante04.pdf
https://www.mof.go.jp/tax_policy/summary/international/tax_c...
> paying tax in my home country
Don't you think you've answered your own question?
A) You work for a US company, earn money from the US company, pay income taxes in the US, live and spend money (and thus sales taxes) in the US
B) You work for a US company, earn money from the US company, pay income taxes in the US, but live and spend money (and thus sales taxes) in Japan
Clearly (B) is better for Japan economically? I think these laws are mostly enforced out of inertia and not any rational reason.
Scenario B is amazing for the US. I don't see how it's clearly better for Japan. I don't know about you but I pay far more in income tax than sales tax. You spend money but you also consume government services and infrastructure while paying less in tax to Japan than a resident employed in Japan would.
Why is it ok for pure tourism? Because tourism is expected to be shorter-term, and you're likely to be putting more money into the local economy as a tourist.
So they need to register this at the very least. I don't know if they tax digital nomad work but they do obviously want to have some control over it.
Because you're breaking the law in that country and your country is actually trying to be help you not do that.
They were created so the local companies wouldn't hire foreign citizens under the table, skirting taxes and depressing wages for local workers, which would be an unpopular outcome amongst voters.
Based on the practical enforcement I get the feeling that most countries don't really care about this, but this situation started happening much faster than visa law changes. Hence the grey area.
But the real explanation is mostly just that it's how the law was written. In general, laws are brokered agreements between those who are currently in power, so they have no principles. More specifically, when countries[1] started implementing categories-and-quotas based immigration control, they decided leisure travel should have its own category, and wrote a restrictive definition of a tourist into the law.
It's important to remember that at the time these laws were written, remote workers didn't exist. If you were entering a country and doing work, it was going to be for a local business, and that visa category had far more restrictive visas intended to privilege native workers over foreign in the labor market. Ergo, the tourism visa has to exclude any work at all. This separation was carried forward into the various reciprocal[2] visa-free travel arrangements that made it so you don't have to physically go to an embassy and file paperwork to get a tourist visa.
Of course, all of this is silly in the Internet age, but good luck convincing every country in the world to allow worldwide labor rights.
[0] Fun fact: the US taxes based on citizenship, not residency, so you will always be double-taxed as a US emigrant, even if you're not remotely working for a US company.
[1] I realize Japan is probably a bad example for this discussion, because they used to be completely closed to both immigration and emigration for over a century. This policy even has a name: "sakoku". In contrast, America used to have an extremely racialized immigration policy, which is what was replaced with the (deracialized) categories and quotas. Before that policy, we actually had a really liberal immigration policy.
[2] COVID-19 notwithstanding
It's unfortunate that the visa is only 6 months and not extendable, but if I really end up liking Japan maybe I'll go to language school so I can stay for longer.
[1]: https://www.mofa.go.jp/j_info/visit/w_holiday/index.html
Now, if it was called Working Vacation...
Otherwise yes
Of course, nomads often did come and with in this status. They would exist in a grey area, arguing their with was more incidental in nature and bit the reason to be in Japan (just like replying to a few with emails while in holiday).
The nomad visa is essentially formalizing this grey area. As other commentors have mentioned, it's not a particularly useful status as you don't get a residence card and you can enroll in national health insurance too. You'll also find it harder to find apartments to rent too
For a paltry 6 months this nomad visa seems like a massive amount of paperwork for no benefit.
Japanese Immigration officials are aware of the pattern of people staying for 80-90 days as “tourists,” spending a few days in Korea, Guam or some other nearby area and then seeking to re-enter Japan for another 90 days. Persons with such a travel pattern can expect to face questions at Japanese Immigration and may be denied entry with the suspicion that they have been or will work illegally in Japan. In that Japanese Immigration records are computerized, a “lost” passport does not serve to mask long stays in Japan.
If you mainly passively own a business in a different country, is that work?
If you mainly passively manage your portfolio of foreign assets, is that work?
Rather than just visiting on a tourist visa and relying on the fact that no immigration officer is going to come bust in your hotel door and yell "hey are you doing work on that laptop!", you go through a bunch of tedious bureaucratic hoops to get the assurance that they definitely for certain won't come inspect what you're doing on your laptop.
But when companies like Shopify go fully remote, if they suddenly have a lot of employees who are frequenting Japan, they are painting a giant target on their back and exposing themselves to legal risk. A company is never going to expose themselves to this kind of legal risk so HR will very quickly (and understandably) clamp down on this. This is why even the most progressive "work from anywhere" policies tend to have fine print that amounts to "your country of residence and any home countries you can legally work in". This is then why we often see "remote" coming with all kinds of conditions like US remote or EU remote etc because the reality of legal compliance for HR is a huge headache.
These nomad visas are a baby step in the right direction towards unburdening companies from this liability.
On paper, all laws are strict. In practice, some of them, and some interpretations of them, are considered a higher priority than others (which can range to straight up ignoring them or even violating them themselves).
The point I'm making is I don't get why they've bothered with such a pointless visa, and it sounds like some PR stunt. If it extended to a year or was a residence permit then it'd be an actual valuable visa worth the effort.
The only thing I can think of is maybe they hoped it'd be used by digital nomads to come work for local companies for 6 months, but that doesn't sound likely. PR gimmick or "we're doing things" purpose more likely.
What's the difference between buying an iPhone and taking one from the Apple store? You get an iPhone at the end of both.
Basically the same thing, from the same root verb “vidēre”; vīsum is “that which has been seen” (noun), vīsa is “which has been seen” (adjective), from which English and some other languages have derived a noun “visa” as a shortening of the modern Latin “charta vīsa” (“paper/document which has been seen”) possibly through a french intermediary before English (different sources I’ve seen disagree on this.)
> My first thought was to work remotely and use the 90 days permitted by the tourist visa. Yet working in Japan on this visa is a gray zone at best and a practice I would stay away from. In fact, the US Embassy in Japan strictly advises against this:
> Persons found working illegally are subject to arrest and deportation.
> Persons believed to be entering Japan without a working visa but who intend to work here can be denied entry into Japan. This means that you will not exit the airport and will be required to return directly to the U.S.
Because you are working in a country, consuming its services, but not paying the local income tax. A work permit either officially ops you out of this or allows you to properly file/pay taxes.
And fyi to Americans reading this: you still owe taxes to the IRS for work done overseas. There are all sorts of deductions and such, but only if you actually file. Not filing in either country could see you owe a huge amount to both, even if that means paying more than 100% tax. Don't risk it.
A lot of countries have laws against working remotely without a visa, although apart from the US few actively enforce them.
Otherwise, opening a work laptop and answering some work emails for your foreign employer would be risky.
This has nothing to do with you working for your own foreign employer while on vacation.
But people don’t go to Japan because it’s cheap – it’s just a really nice place to live for some.
Someone coming from a German city with good public transit might not think it's that cheap though. But a lot of digital nomads are Americans.
Poking around sites online it was quite easy to find apartments fairly centrally in Tokyo for $1000-1300/month if you were staying for 3-6 months. While that is far from cheap, I certainly wouldn't call it expensive in the grand scheme of major international cities.
Maybe it’s selection bias, but pretty much anywhere I’ve been lately taxi (or actually ride hailing) is at least pretty affordable. E.g. a half hour ride I took late at night in HK was US$30, and about US$10 in Singapore. In Tokyo it was $60.
So yeah, on the whole, Tokyo is like half the cost of London and you get more for your money.
https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?cou...
It's how living in a civilised, first world country should be.
They're 12th on this list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intention...
The top 10 are mostly microstates or Pacific Island nations.
On the Tokyo metro this year I saw many advertisements for hair issues; lots of ads with balding noggins, contrasted with thick gorgeous heads of hair that you can acquire by making an appointment through a (naturally!) Japanese domain. In London, meanwhile, I saw zero ads for any hair-related products or services on the tube. Though if there were, I would imagine most would be advertised with a UK TLD.
