In May 2026, the Thai government formally decided to shorten the 60-day visa exemption it had granted to 93 countries and regions, including Japan, to 30 days. The background is a sharp rise in special fraud schemes and illegal employment by people exploiting the visa-free system. What deserves particular attention is that Japan is included on Thailand’s “review list.”
In this article, I would like to look at this news from the perspective of a Japanese gyoseishoshi (administrative scrivener) specializing in immigration and status-of-residence matters, and consider what it means for companies employing foreign nationals, for HR professionals, and for foreign residents living in Japan themselves. I will also share, candidly, where Japanese immigration policy may be heading, and what stance I believe we should take.
- Overview of the News: Why Thailand Is Tightening, and Why Japan Is on the List
- The Risk of the Phrase “People of Country X”
- Implications for Japan: Where Is Residence Status Policy Heading?
- How to View the Takaichi Administration’s Tightening Direction
- Practical Preparation for Employers and HR Professionals
- To Foreign Residents Living in Japan
- A Closing Word from a Practitioner
Overview of the News: Why Thailand Is Tightening, and Why Japan Is on the List
As part of its post-COVID tourism recovery strategy, Thailand introduced 60-day visa-free stays in July 2024 for citizens of 93 countries and regions, including Japan. By international standards, this was an unusually generous arrangement.
Only about 2 years later, however, the policy is now being reversed. According to media reports, the following abuses have been increasing:
- Formation of special fraud rings by long-staying foreigners
- Unauthorized employment after entering as tourists
- De facto long-term residence achieved by repeated short stays
To address this, on May 19, 2025, the Thai Cabinet decided to shorten the visa-free stay to within 30 days, with some exceptions. The new measure will take effect 15 days after its publication in the official gazette.
The key point is that Japan is included among the countries under review. Japanese travelers may no longer be able to stay in Thailand for 60 continuous days. This affects not only individual tourists, but also long-stay residents, remote workers, and small and medium-sized enterprises operating locally in Thailand.
The Risk of the Phrase “People of Country X”
Before going further, one point must be addressed.
The phrase “people of country X” refers to a national population as a whole, not to individual character or behavior. The overwhelming majority of Thai nationals, like the overwhelming majority of Japanese nationals, are people quietly working hard to live decent lives. A small minority in every country behave otherwise. This reflects human behavior, not nationality.
For this reason, arguments such as “shortening Thailand’s visa exemption is discrimination against XX people,” or “treating Japanese nationals as a review target means suspecting all Japanese,” miss the broader point. National visa policy is not a tool for judging individuals. It is an administrative act of risk management based on statistical trends observed across a national population.
That said, there is legitimate debate over country-by-country policy adjustment:
- Supporters: Data-based risk management is a state responsibility.
- Critics: Decisions should be made on individual screening, not by making distinctions based on nationality.
My own position is this: where statistical trends of crime or document fraud clearly originate from a specific country, it is, to some extent unavoidable, for the receiving state to respond on a country-by-country basis. Thailand’s decision is a rational choice consistent with that logic.
Implications for Japan: Where Is Residence Status Policy Heading?
The Thai case is not someone else’s problem. Japan, too, is increasingly confronting similar issues:
- Disappearance of workers under the Specified Skilled Worker (Tokutei Ginō) and Technical Intern Training programs
- Substantial overwork under student visa categories
- Applications supported by forged certificates of employment or tax payment
- Organized document-forgery networks linked to specific countries
- Setting up shell companies under the Business Manager (Keiei/Kanri) visa
The Immigration Services Agency has, in recent years, been tightening screening standards across the board. The ongoing review of capital requirements for the Business Manager visa, stricter operation of the Specified Skilled Worker system, and verification of actual study activity under student visas all point in the same direction: screening standards are becoming stricter.
If serious patterns of crime or organized residence-status fraud increasingly originate from specific countries, Japan should, in my view, keep open the option of differentiating screening standards by country, or removing certain countries from visa-exempt status. This should not be viewed as anti-foreigner sentiment. It is the opposite: it is about protecting the overwhelming majority of honest foreign workers by removing the malicious minority.
How to View the Takaichi Administration’s Tightening Direction
As of 2025, the Takaichi administration is signaling a tightening of policies toward foreign nationals: stricter requirements for the Business Manager visa, a sharper response to welfare-receiving foreign residents, and closer review of permanent residence applications from certain countries.
I understand parts of this direction, but I am cautious about an overly simplistic “tighten everything” approach.
The reason is simple. Blanket tightening hurts hardest precisely those who have most faithfully followed the rules—honest foreign workers, and the Japanese small and medium-sized enterprises that depend on them. Tourism, accommodation, food service, elderly care, construction, agriculture—none of these sectors function today without foreign workers. Applying such tightening measures indiscriminately could seriously damage regional economies.
What is genuinely needed is the flexibility to adjust the level of scrutiny by country, by residence status, and by sector, according to the situation. Be strict where the risk is real; maintain a stable and welcoming system where conditions are sound. Only when this distinction is made does the word “policy” deserve to be used.
Practical Preparation for Employers and HR Professionals
For company executives and HR professionals already employing foreign nationals, or considering doing so, please keep in mind the following:
First, conduct an internal review of the renewal schedules of your foreign staff. Operational standards may change by country and by residence status within the coming years.
Second, do not depend on a single recruitment route. Reliance on a single sending country or sending organization creates the risk that a single policy change can disrupt your recruitment pipeline entirely.
Third, build an internal process to verify the authenticity of submitted documents. If forged documents are found in an application, the employer may also bear consequences.
Fourth, establish a relationship with a specialist before problems arise. The most rational form of risk management is to have an advisor in place during stable periods, not only when the system shifts.
To Foreign Residents Living in Japan
If you are a foreign national living in Japan—learning the language, paying taxes, contributing to your local community—debates over tightening can create anxiety. On social media, foreign nationals are sometimes treated as a single group, in harsh terms.
But the proper purpose of the system is to exclude a malicious minority and to protect those who genuinely follow the rules and contribute to society. If you submit accurate documents, do not include false statements in your application, and properly pay taxes and social insurance contributions, there is no need for excessive anxiety.
That said, even applications previously regarded as “safe” are increasingly being denied under the recent tightening. As your renewal date approaches, please consult a specialist early. Residence-status issues can become extremely difficult to resolve once left unaddressed.
A Closing Word from a Practitioner
What I most sincerely hope for is simple. I hope Japan remains a society in which foreign nationals who genuinely strive to live honest, hard-working lives are properly rewarded—and a society that welcomes such individuals warmly.
Country-specific screening and individual inclusion are not mutually exclusive. On the contrary, only when both are in place does true coexistence with foreign workers become possible. Working day to day in Niseko and Kutchan, where foreign and Japanese residents live and work side by side, I feel this more strongly with each passing year.
Thailand’s visa exemption reduction is not just news from across the sea. It is also a question Japan is being asked. I hope both employers and foreign residents will take this issue seriously.
Please note that this article is based on information available as of May 2025. The operation of residence-status systems is constantly evolving, and outcomes vary significantly based on individual circumstances. Any actual decisions should be made on the basis of the most recent information and consultation with a qualified immigration specialist.
Reference:
https://news.yahoo.co.jp/articles/e8592617e9c59a0f1846054f61a2f499d0f7eb38
