USFK Cost Sharing Deal Reportedly Reached; ROK to Pay Less than $1 Billion

If this report is accurate it appears the ROK government has once again gotten what they wanted from the US-ROK cost sharing negotiations with the caveat that it is only a one year deal:

Camp Humphreys, a U.S. Forces Korea base in Pyeongtaek, Gyeonggi Province, is seen in this file photo. Yonhap

South Korea and the United States are expected to strike a deal this week on splitting the cost for the stationing of American troops here as the allies consider the need to work closely together to denuclearize North Korea, a diplomatic source said Sunday.

The U.S. will likely accept South Korea’s request for a contribution of less than US$1 billion (1.1 trillion won) in 2019.

Seoul plans to sign a one-year contract as Washington demands, according to the source.

Last year, South Korea paid around 960 billion won for the 28,500-strong U.S. Forces Korea (USFK) under a five-year deal signed in 2014.

Korea Times

You can read more at the link, but since this is a one year deal I would expect the Trump administration to ratchet up the pressure again for the ROK to pay $1.2 billion when negotiations begin again later this year.

Tags:
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

15 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
setnaffa
setnaffa
5 years ago

Ya get what ya pay for…

Robert
Robert
5 years ago

Still a significant increase for the ROK, more than 10 percent. MJI said more than 1 trillion won is unpalatable, now is paying 1.1 trillion. No way Trump was getting the ROKs to pay over $1billion.

Flyingsword
Flyingsword
5 years ago

US needs to depart Korea. South Koreans are an untrustworthy ally. Smile at the US but working with the north Koreans behind the back.

ChickenHead
ChickenHead
5 years ago

1. Nobody reads Trumps books. If you want 1.1 trillion, you don’t ask for 1.1 trillion. The media and NeverTrumpers gleefully laugh that not getting 1 billion dollars is a loss for him (and gleefully laugh at America’s loss in the process)… but has anyone considered that he is perfectly happy with 1.1 trillion… which is not only an unusually high percentage increase in any deal of this type but is above the limit Korea loudly set. This sounds like brilliant negotiation rather than failure… and, like all genius negotiation, it is best to walk away with exactly what you want while everyone smirks and thinks they beat you.

2. The current Korean politics are temporary… just like Kim an Ro’s past sunshine policies. Anybody who thinks Koreans won’t take to the streets if commie-love starts cutting into their soju or hogwon budgets is kidding themselves.

Rascal1212
Rascal1212
5 years ago

Please remember this is a promise. Negotiating payment is ahead. Koreans make promises with intent to break them. Actual payments would not survive an audit.

kangaji
kangaji
5 years ago

“Hog”won. 학원 學院 “study house”; Hog won = Pig house? Institution for pigs? 삼겹쌀 house? Is this an unintentional or intentional pun?

AppeasingNorthKorea
AppeasingNorthKorea
5 years ago

$1.1 Trillion Won is almost $1 billion based on today’s exchange rate. It’s just $20 million short of $1 billion. Surely the US is not complaining over this?

ChickenHead
ChickenHead
5 years ago

“Hogwon” is intentional.

It is a more accurate pronunciation than hakwon or hokwon…

…and, you must admit, evoking pig imagery is cuter than hacks “teaching” Englishee or ajushi hocking up a lung oyster to spit on the crowded sidewalk.

setnaffa
setnaffa
5 years ago

As CH pointed out earlier, and everyone who ever haggled for somethin’ in Itaewon knows, both sides start out with something different than their minimum sell or maximum buy price…

But the buyer in this case, South Korea, may have been reminded that US and Japanese interests must also be respected as part of a regional defense system.

Liz
Liz
5 years ago

OT question to CH: I hope it’s okay to go a bit off topic…
What is your impression of the new H1B visa regulations? I’ve read a lot of pro-trump folks are kind of angry about it and think he isn’t doing what he said on immigration. Your thoughts are appreciated, if you feel like answering and have the time.

ChickenHead
ChickenHead
5 years ago

Liz,

Hmmm… not really sure.

What are Trumpers complaining about?

My understanding (without really looking into it)…

Trump’s new changes:

– “securing a work visa for foreign nationals accomplished in the math and engineering fields fit for high tech has become more difficult under the “Buy America, Hire American” executive order President Trump signed in April of last year. The policy directs the Department of Homeland Security to issue H-1B visas to only the most-skilled foreigners or highest-paid beneficiaries.”

So companies are now encouraged to hire Americans instead of non-American at half price. No problem there… globalizing labor costs (but not product prices) is great for companies but death to the middle class.

– “in August, Trump immigration officials announced they would expand the suspension of premium processing for H-1B petitions.”

It is an artificial barrier to make it harder, longer, and more expensive to hire non-Americans. No problem there either… making it cheap and easy to hire non-Americans is a perverse incentive.

– “the U.S. Department of Labor began requiring that employers of H-1B applicants use a new Labor Condition Application form (LCA), ETA 9035. Critics claim the new form is designed to elicit internal information from employers and increase government pressure upon H-1B employed companies, with the intended possibility of negative attention from the press. The new labor conditions could deter tech companies from hiring skilled graduates abroad lest they fork out too much in annual wages, and could compel them to “hire American” in line with Trump’s new order. Alternatively, if companies cannot source adequate American-born employees, the new conditions may result in selected foreign employees being appointed at much higher salaries.”

Transparency, shaming for corporate shitbaggery, encouraging market wages to be paid to take away the big advantage for ditching Americans and hiring non-Americans… but still allowing non-Americans to be hired if there is honestly no American to do the job… sounds good.

– “These U.S. restrictions impact Indian and Chinese nationals most because they account for the vast majority of these visas. ”

Chinese are notorious spies and Indians may get their act together enough to siphon American tech knowledge back to India… so why encourage this self-sabotage by not hiring American?

All these quotes come from an immigration lawyer trying to crap on Trump and his strict immigration policies… but he sold me on it.

What are Trumpers unhappy about?

setnaffa
setnaffa
5 years ago

Trumpers are unhappy about the NeverTrump press?

Liz
Liz
5 years ago

Hey thanks for the considered response, CH.
I’ve only heard this disgruntled-ness recently, after Trump ended the government shut down and some think he caved. I’m surrounded by confirmation bias, so when someone says something different it stands out. One person owns a couple of businesses they employ a lot of blue collar types who typically don’t vote but came to the ballots for Trump. He says they’re not pleased and think he has failed at immigration reform. From my perspective, Trump has done a great job.
Here is a link he provided: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/washington-secrets/census-bureau-75-million-more-immigrants-by-2060-95-of-future-us-growth
Per H1B visas specifically: https://cis.org/Miano/H1B-Trump-Needs-Pay-More-Attention-Voters-Swamp

setnaffa
setnaffa
5 years ago

Liz, the CIS link is from people who hate all immigrants. The Examiner has been more reliable than many newsmongers; but is far from a pro-Trump paper.

Trump’s hands are tied by laws already on the books and a Congress controlled by the American Chambrr of Commerce whose membership wants plentiful cheap labor, regardless of whether the imported variety is good for the country’s long-term health.

15
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x