It was reported that Japan’s Children and Families Agency plans to request about ¥7.8 trillion in its budget request for fiscal 2027 — the largest amount since the agency’s founding — sparking a divided debate on a 5ch thread. Supporters argued that benefits and support for child-raising households are actually insufficient, while skeptics countered that it’s unreasonable to face criticism without disclosing a breakdown, insisting the agency show where the money would go first. The discussion also touched on individual budget items, including the gap between existing programs like child allowances and free childcare and the requested amount, as well as the scrapped AI development project and the use of funds from the so-called ‘singles tax.’
The Children and Families Agency has begun coordinating to request about ¥7.8 trillion in its initial fiscal 2027 budget request — the largest amount since its establishment in 2023. This is roughly ¥320 billion more than the previous year’s request. It includes funding for countermeasures against the record-high number of child suicides and for improving the environment around children’s social media use.
Source: news.yahoo.co.jp / Read the original article here
I don't buy the criticism of the Children and Families Agency.
Most of this budget goes toward managing benefit payments and actual support for households raising kids — if anything it's not enough, it's not something you can just cut.
Most of this budget goes toward managing benefit payments and actual support for households raising kids — if anything it's not enough, it's not something you can just cut.
>>9
That's exactly why they should publish it with that stuff excluded.
There's definitely a ton of unnecessary stuff in there too.
That's exactly why they should publish it with that stuff excluded.
There's definitely a ton of unnecessary stuff in there too.
>>9
Then show us the breakdown 😅
You said it, so you can back it up, right?
Then show us the breakdown 😅
You said it, so you can back it up, right?
After-school childcare programs these days even handle pickup/drop-off for the kids, so the burden on families is actually low — but it genuinely costs more than it used to.
I get why single people complain, but it's wild seeing parents who are actually raising kids say to abolish the Children and Families Agency.
I get why single people complain, but it's wild seeing parents who are actually raising kids say to abolish the Children and Families Agency.
>>11
Where is this after-school program with pickup service? Seriously, I can't even find it when I search.
Where is this after-school program with pickup service? Seriously, I can't even find it when I search.
>>21
Well, not exactly pickup, but they do come get the kids from school once classes end.
Well, not exactly pickup, but they do come get the kids from school once classes end.
>>29
>>11 is saying the after-school program drops kids off at home.
>>11 is saying the after-school program drops kids off at home.
>>19
The topic here is the ¥7.8 trillion, though? Do you even know what we're talking about?
The topic here is the ¥7.8 trillion, though? Do you even know what we're talking about?
>>24
The broad outline is similar to this, right?
The broad outline is similar to this, right?
>>44
I'm saying it's increasing because things are changing.
You can't just fill in the blanks yourself and then claim it can't be cut — that's the point I'm making.
I'm saying it's increasing because things are changing.
You can't just fill in the blanks yourself and then claim it can't be cut — that's the point I'm making.
>>50
Then tell me exactly what and how much you think can be cut.
Then tell me exactly what and how much you think can be cut.
>>50
It's only going up 4%, so nothing's really changing.
It's only going up 4%, so nothing's really changing.
I can easily imagine that reviewing how the budget's spent would turn up waste.
If anything, a review would probably show it's not enough.
If anything, a review would probably show it's not enough.
Why is the budget going up when the number of children is going down?
>>56
Because the number of adults is shrinking too.
Because the number of adults is shrinking too.
>>56
Everyone already knows that much.
Everyone already knows that much.
>>64
Is that even relevant?
>>65
Care to explain?
Is that even relevant?
>>65
Care to explain?
>>74
Parents these days both work, so childcare gets outsourced from age zero.
Can't believe you don't even know that.
Scary.
Parents these days both work, so childcare gets outsourced from age zero.
Can't believe you don't even know that.
Scary.
>>76
That cost should be borne by the couple outsourcing it — it's no reason for the Children and Families Agency to foot the bill.
If you can't cover daycare operating costs, have one of you quit and raise the kid at home.
Why are you married couples using us single people's tax money just so you can both keep working?
That cost should be borne by the couple outsourcing it — it's no reason for the Children and Families Agency to foot the bill.
If you can't cover daycare operating costs, have one of you quit and raise the kid at home.
Why are you married couples using us single people's tax money just so you can both keep working?
Number of children born in 2025:
671,236
If you split ¥7.8 trillion among newborns,
that's about ¥11,620,637 per child.
Just scrap the agency and wire ¥10 million to every family that has a kid.
That leaves ¥1 trillion left over, so hand that out to preschool/kindergarten workers.
Problem solved, birthrate crisis over.
671,236
If you split ¥7.8 trillion among newborns,
that's about ¥11,620,637 per child.
Just scrap the agency and wire ¥10 million to every family that has a kid.
That leaves ¥1 trillion left over, so hand that out to preschool/kindergarten workers.
Problem solved, birthrate crisis over.
>>137
It's obvious some parents would blow the money on useless stuff, and rich households, poor households, and single-parent households are all in different situations, so it wouldn't solve anything.
It's obvious some parents would blow the money on useless stuff, and rich households, poor households, and single-parent households are all in different situations, so it wouldn't solve anything.
>>137
Once the subsidy amount is public knowledge, it just becomes a target to squeeze — you can tell from how maternity hospitals raised their fees to match the increased childbirth lump-sum payment. But with an amount that big, whoever's trying to price-gouge off the back of it would have a hard time deciding how much to jack prices up.
Once the subsidy amount is public knowledge, it just becomes a target to squeeze — you can tell from how maternity hospitals raised their fees to match the increased childbirth lump-sum payment. But with an amount that big, whoever's trying to price-gouge off the back of it would have a hard time deciding how much to jack prices up.
What's with the people going red-faced (spamming under one ID) making this bizarre argument that raising kids costs money?
That has nothing to do with the Children and Families Agency.
That has nothing to do with the Children and Families Agency.
>>161
Well, the fact that raising kids costs money is one of the causes of the falling birthrate, isn't it?
Well, the fact that raising kids costs money is one of the causes of the falling birthrate, isn't it?
>>161
That's because most of the Children and Families Agency's budget is childcare-related spending.
Even if you abolished the agency, some other ministry would just end up handling child support with that same money.
That's because most of the Children and Families Agency's budget is childcare-related spending.
Even if you abolished the agency, some other ministry would just end up handling child support with that same money.
>>161
The whole point is that raising kids costs money, which is why there are all these allowances and support programs — yet people come in with criticism from completely out of left field, like 'it's pointless, stop wasting tax money.'
The whole point is that raising kids costs money, which is why there are all these allowances and support programs — yet people come in with criticism from completely out of left field, like 'it's pointless, stop wasting tax money.'
Children and Families Agency policies:
・Collaboration with the J.League
・Priority lanes for children at national facilities
・Subsidies for open-plan kitchens
・Home visits for child-raising households
・Training personnel to advise children on sex education (5-year plan)
・Abuse-detection AI → spent ¥1 billion, then scrapped it
・Introduction of the 'singles tax'
・Handling adult advertising
・Collaboration with the J.League
・Priority lanes for children at national facilities
・Subsidies for open-plan kitchens
・Home visits for child-raising households
・Training personnel to advise children on sex education (5-year plan)
・Abuse-detection AI → spent ¥1 billion, then scrapped it
・Introduction of the 'singles tax'
・Handling adult advertising
>>173
Honestly, I get why they'd want to develop abuse-detection AI.
These days, if a couple with a young kid has a loud enough argument that the neighbors hear it, a child welfare center worker shows up the next day citing psychological abuse.
Honestly, I get why they'd want to develop abuse-detection AI.
These days, if a couple with a young kid has a loud enough argument that the neighbors hear it, a child welfare center worker shows up the next day citing psychological abuse.
>>173
They've positioned the past few years as the peak of countermeasures, with the period through 2027 marked as the intensive push — that's why it's like this.
'It's only been around a short time' has nothing to do with it.
They've positioned the past few years as the peak of countermeasures, with the period through 2027 marked as the intensive push — that's why it's like this.
'It's only been around a short time' has nothing to do with it.
I'm not saying the Children and Families Agency is worthless across the board, but I don't get why it needs ¥7.8 trillion.
It's crazy that the gap between this and the defense budget — which covers that many SDF personnel plus missiles, tanks, and fighter jets — is only ¥1-2 trillion.
It's crazy that the gap between this and the defense budget — which covers that many SDF personnel plus missiles, tanks, and fighter jets — is only ¥1-2 trillion.
>>174
What's with people who complain without even checking something you could look up in two seconds?
Child allowances, free childcare, better pay for daycare workers, higher-education support — basically everything the public said was needed for birthrate countermeasures is in there.
What's with people who complain without even checking something you could look up in two seconds?
Child allowances, free childcare, better pay for daycare workers, higher-education support — basically everything the public said was needed for birthrate countermeasures is in there.
>>180
Even so, isn't it too much?
Add up all those allowances together and the total payout is ¥3 trillion.
What's the other ¥4 trillion going toward?
Even so, isn't it too much?
Add up all those allowances together and the total payout is ¥3 trillion.
What's the other ¥4 trillion going toward?
>>197
Which part don't you get?
Which part don't you get?
>>234
Specifically, what part of >>200 is wasteful?
Specifically, what part of >>200 is wasteful?
With my totally amateur logic, I'd think just paying ¥5 million per kid born would boost the birthrate.
Wouldn't that work? Even on average a person pays tens of millions of yen in taxes over a lifetime, so it seems like it'd easily pay for itself.
Wouldn't that work? Even on average a person pays tens of millions of yen in taxes over a lifetime, so it seems like it'd easily pay for itself.
>>203
It'd be a problem if the kid got killed right after birth for the money, so wouldn't long-term monthly payments be better?
It'd be a problem if the kid got killed right after birth for the money, so wouldn't long-term monthly payments be better?
>>203
You'd risk people having kids carelessly just for the payout, or criminals exploiting it.
If it's that easy to casually have a kid, the government needs to have facilities and systems ready to clean up the mess.
You'd risk people having kids carelessly just for the payout, or criminals exploiting it.
If it's that easy to casually have a kid, the government needs to have facilities and systems ready to clean up the mess.
Made school lunches free using the singles tax 🤗
https://imgur.com/sa1uBew.jpeg
https://imgur.com/sa1uBew.jpeg
>>225
Add the leftover-heavy lunch budget on top of the existing lunch fees and you could feed the kids sushi or steak — this is way too much money considering how few kids there are.
Add the leftover-heavy lunch budget on top of the existing lunch fees and you could feed the kids sushi or steak — this is way too much money considering how few kids there are.
※This article is excerpted and summarized from the 5ch (Nandemo Jikkyo G) thread ‘Children and Families Agency: Give Us ¥7.8 Trillion’.
Leave a Reply