National Pension Service Clarifies Stance Amid Controversy Over Foreigners' Retroactive Contributions

The National Pension Service (NPS) has stated that the rights of foreigners should not be discriminated against based on nationality, regarding the recently controversial retroactive contribution system for foreign nationals.

Kim Sung-joo, Chairman of the National Pension Service, posted an article titled "The Purpose, Problems, and Supplementary Measures of the National Pension Retroactive Contribution System" on his social media yesterday (the 30th) to express his stance on the controversy surrounding foreign retroactive contributions.

Chairman Kim stated that the retroactive contributions by foreigners itself should not be restricted based on nationality.

"Anyone working at a workplace in Korea is required to pay national pension and national health insurance premiums regardless of whether they are a Korean or foreign national," Kim said. "Our citizens are also receiving the same obligations and benefits abroad."

At the same time, based on the number of applications for foreign retroactive contributions in the first half of this year, he cautioned against discussions on institutional improvement spreading into controversies over the exclusion of specific countries.

"Looking at it by country, ethnic Koreans in China accounted for 792 cases, or 79.7%, followed by China at 6.4%, the United States at 4.7%, and Japan at 3%," he explained, adding that "80% of all foreign retroactive contribution cases were ethnic Koreans from China."

"Ultimately, restricting retroactive contributions by foreigners leads to the issue of whether it is acceptable in terms of public sentiment for ethnic Koreans from China to have the same level of social security benefits as domestic citizens," he pointed out.

He suggested that certain restrictions could be placed on methods where premiums are paid for only a short period and then a long period of past subscription months is retroactively paid—such as the recently controversial case of "paying for 1 month and retroactively paying for 119 months."

Previously, equity controversies arose as foreign subscribers with a history of paying for just one month could lump-sum pay up to 119 months' worth under the retroactive contribution system—which was originally introduced to alleviate blind spots in old-age security for vulnerable groups such as career-interrupted homemakers—thereby meeting the minimum 10-year subscription period required to receive an old-age pension.

(Reported by Kim Jiuk | Video by Hong Jin-young | Graphics by Yook Do-hyun | Produced by SBS Digital News | Video source: SNS of National Pension Service Chairman Kim Sung-joo)
※ Please note: This article was translated by AI and may contain errors.