Japan is changing the rules for who can stay. New requirements for permanent residency and citizenship take effect in phases from October 1, and they are making life harder for the country’s foreign residents.
Abdul, a Bangladeshi tech engineer living in northern Tokyo, is preparing to apply for both permanent residency and citizenship. He arrived nearly eight years ago for work and says he feels more at home in Japan than in Bangladesh. Now he is starting to look for opportunities outside the country because of uncertainty over the tightened rules.
Sarah Nelkin, an American who has lived in Japan for 14 years and works in the entertainment industry, submitted a permanent residency application shortly before the changes were announced. She fears she may have to give up her US citizenship if her application is rejected, as Japan does not recognise dual nationality.
The new bar for applicants
Under the new rules, applicants must show household income exceeding the Japanese average. That requirement applies retroactively to applications submitted since April.
Applicants must also demonstrate Japanese-language proficiency and have a pension pot equivalent to 30 years of payouts. The Immigration Services Agency has emphasised that applicants should “live independently” and have “a stable life without the risk of becoming a burden.”
“Live independently” and “a stable life without the risk of becoming a burden”
Numbers behind the shift
Japan’s foreign resident population hit a record 4.12 million, or about 3 percent of the total population, by the end of 2025. By some estimates, Japan’s foreign-born population could reach the OECD average of 10 percent by 2070.
At the same time, the number of Japanese nationals fell by more than 900,000 between January 2025 and 2026 amid the country’s low birthrate. A recent survey by the Institute of Social Science at the University of Tokyo found 56.3 percent of Japanese people oppose accepting more foreigners, up from 35.6 percent in 2024.
Risa Hagiwara, a professor of economics at Meikai University, said the changes reflect a shift towards a “selective and conditional” immigration policy that is in tension with Japan’s need for labour amid a shrinking population.
Who is pushing the rules
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, while campaigning for the leadership of the Liberal Democratic Party last year, said Japan should “reconsider, at least for now, policies that allow in people with completely different cultures and backgrounds.” Her coalition agreement with the right-wing Japan Innovation Party pledged a firm stance against foreigners who break the rules, as well as steps to address “potential social friction” from a growing foreign population.
The far-right, anti-immigration Sanseito party has gained ground with its “Japan First” messaging, winning a record 15 seats at the most recent lower-house election to become the third-largest opposition party.
What Abdul and Nelkin face
Abdul’s story is personal. He has built a life in Japan and now faces uncertainty about whether he can stay. The income threshold and the pension requirement are demanding, and they apply retroactively to people who submitted papers before the announcement.
Nelkin’s case is different. She has lived in Japan for 14 years and has already put down roots. Giving up her US citizenship would be a significant step, and she has not ruled it out.
The new rules are being rolled out in phases, which means some applicants will be judged by the old standards while others face the new ones. That creates confusion for people planning their futures.
The political context
Japan’s foreign population has grown steadily in recent years, and the country is facing demographic pressures that immigration could help ease. Public opinion has shifted against accepting more foreigners, and political parties have responded by taking a harder line.
Takaichi’s comments during her campaign reflected that mood, and her coalition agreement with the Innovation Party made explicit the desire to crack down on foreigners who break the rules.
The Sanseito party’s rise shows that anti-immigration sentiment has a strong base of support. Its record 15 seats make it the third-largest opposition party.
What happens next
The rules take effect in phases from October 1, and the retroactive income requirement means some applicants who submitted papers before the announcement will be judged against the new standard.
Abdul’s decision to look for opportunities outside Japan is a warning sign. Nelkin’s fear of losing her US citizenship is another warning. The new rules are closing doors to people who have already proven they can contribute.
- The new rules require household income exceeding the Japanese average.
- Applicants must demonstrate Japanese-language proficiency.
- Applicants must have a pension pot equivalent to 30 years of payouts.
- The income threshold applies retroactively to applications submitted since April.
Where the paper stands
The paper backs Abdul and Sarah Nelkin as individuals seeking to live where they choose, and is against the Japanese government tightening the rules for permanent residency and citizenship that make life harder for the country’s foreign residents. The rules are demanding, they apply retroactively, and they punish people who have already built their lives in Japan.
The paper supports smaller government and less control over people’s lives. When power gathers in one place, an agency, an office or a party, it gets abused. The Immigration Services Agency is writing its own authority here, setting mandates on private life, and the paper is against it, whoever holds it.
The new requirements — household income above the national average, Japanese-language proficiency, a pension pot for 30 years — are a heavy burden on applicants. The retroactive income threshold punishes people who submitted papers before the announcement was made. The paper is against any office gathering more power, whatever party holds it.
Source material: “Japan moves to tighten rules for foreigners,” aljazeera.com.
Get the Notebook.
The day's best stories and every fresh verdict, in plain English, in your inbox by seven. One email a day, no more.