Is being a full-time employee better than being on a contract (or a temp) for a naturalization application?
 |
| A regular job is good / best, but not always necessary |
- English teachers
- Software programmers
- Japanese to English translators
I'm often asked by people "how much money do I have to make to qualify for naturalization?"
While Japan's MoJ (法務省) doesn't reveal their exact criteria, I have spoken to case officers and inquired about other successful applicants, and the general answer is: you don't have to make much.
The generic answer is: if your take-home income, minus your liabilities (debts, expenses for food and rent) is comfortably above "average" compared to a typical Japanese — especially if your gross income is around the average for Japanese [March 2015: ¥288,590 gross income per month], you should be fine.
In the examples of the ideal candidate in the applicant guidebook, the fictional South Korean applicant is a regular employee that had the following income profile:
However, what's more important than the amount of money you make is how stable and predictable your income is. There are some exceptional people whose income is erratic, but they have so much money in savings or their jobs are so high paying and their education/qualifications are so outstanding that the reviewers may overlook an unpredictable income stream.
The only applicants that do not need to prove they have the ways and means to financially support themselves (in other words, they can be receiving welfare and/or below poverty level) are Special Permanent Residents / SPRs (特別永住者).
Also, if you're naturally financially dependent on others (homemaker, minor, etc), then your provider (your spouse or family) will be the one who is evaluated regarding their finances.
As a general rule of thumb, though, similar to agencies that give out credit (cards, loans, etc) in Japan, they longer you've lived in one place and the longer you've worked at the same place, the better. And the longer the employer has been in business — as well as the stability of the business, measured by how long it's been around, its size, and its capital. On paper, it's much easier for a bureaucracy to figure out if you're still going to be able to earn enough money based on your job rather than your "potential" based on past income, assignments, experience or education.
To be clear: if you do not have a "traditional job", that's not necessarily a disqualifier or even a negative factor depending on the type of job / income. However, if you do have a type of living that involves lining up assignments with no guarantee of continuity, it's best to make sure there are few (ideally no) gaps in your bank book (通帳) — which they do check — that show extended periods (ex. over a month) of no income coming in.
In the examples of the ideal candidate in the applicant guidebook, the fictional South Korean applicant is a regular employee that had the following income profile:
- ¥284,000/month in salary
- ¥65,000/month from a rental property
- ¥64,000/month from a part-time job his spouse has
For a total of ¥413,000/month. Of that, the fictional successful candidate detailed how the money was used for him and his wife:
- ¥120,000/month for food
- ¥97,500/month on rent + administration fees
- ¥33,000/month on education
- ¥28,500/month on debt payments
- ¥30,000/month on insurance
- ¥70,000/month on savings
- ¥34,000/month on other (electricity, water, medical, etc.)
His only debt was a car, which he had ¥1,458,000 left in payments that he expected to pay off in a few years.
However, what's more important than the amount of money you make is how stable and predictable your income is. There are some exceptional people whose income is erratic, but they have so much money in savings or their jobs are so high paying and their education/qualifications are so outstanding that the reviewers may overlook an unpredictable income stream.
The only applicants that do not need to prove they have the ways and means to financially support themselves (in other words, they can be receiving welfare and/or below poverty level) are Special Permanent Residents / SPRs (特別永住者).
Also, if you're naturally financially dependent on others (homemaker, minor, etc), then your provider (your spouse or family) will be the one who is evaluated regarding their finances.
As a general rule of thumb, though, similar to agencies that give out credit (cards, loans, etc) in Japan, they longer you've lived in one place and the longer you've worked at the same place, the better. And the longer the employer has been in business — as well as the stability of the business, measured by how long it's been around, its size, and its capital. On paper, it's much easier for a bureaucracy to figure out if you're still going to be able to earn enough money based on your job rather than your "potential" based on past income, assignments, experience or education.
To be clear: if you do not have a "traditional job", that's not necessarily a disqualifier or even a negative factor depending on the type of job / income. However, if you do have a type of living that involves lining up assignments with no guarantee of continuity, it's best to make sure there are few (ideally no) gaps in your bank book (通帳) — which they do check — that show extended periods (ex. over a month) of no income coming in.
