# Bernie Sanders Proposes 50% Stock Tax on AI Giants to Create Public Sovereign Wealth Fund **Source:** https://glitchwire.com/news/bernie-sanders-proposes-50-stock-tax-on-ai-giants-to-create-public-sovereign-wea/ **Published:** 2026-06-01T18:13:02.654Z **Author:** AI Desk ยท Glitchwire **Categories:** AI, Policy ## Summary The Vermont senator's American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act would give the federal government voting shares and board seats in OpenAI, Anthropic, and xAI, with proceeds flowing directly to citizens. ## Article Senator Bernie Sanders on Monday announced his intention to introduce legislation that would fundamentally alter the ownership structure of America's largest artificial intelligence companies. Writing in a [New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/) op-ed, the Vermont independent outlined the American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act, a bill that would impose a one-time 50% tax paid not in cash but in stock from OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI, and other frontier AI firms. The mechanics are straightforward. Rather than collecting profits, the federal government would acquire direct equity stakes in the companies building the technology Sanders calls "the most transformational in the history of the world." Those shares would carry voting rights and board representation, giving the public a formal say in how these systems develop. "The federal government would have the power, through its voting shares and an equal representation on each company's board, to block decisions that hurt our citizens and to push for policies that help them," Sanders wrote. The fund's gains would flow to citizens through direct payments, with additional proceeds directed toward healthcare, housing, and education. ## The Argument for Public Ownership Sanders frames the proposal as compensation for what he considers the unpaid appropriation of collective human knowledge. AI systems are trained on the accumulated output of writers, artists, researchers, and ordinary people. He argues that when a public resource generates wealth, the public should share in that wealth. AI is being built on "the accumulated knowledge, creativity and labor of mankind," he wrote. The proposal draws from existing models. Norway's Government Pension Fund and Alaska's Permanent Fund both capture resource extraction revenue for public benefit. Sanders sees AI compute as an analogous resource, one where the value extracted should not flow exclusively to a narrow class of investors and executives. Notably, both [Anthropic](https://www.anthropic.com/research/economic-policy-responses) and OpenAI have themselves floated sovereign wealth fund concepts in their own policy papers. Anthropic's October 2025 economic policy document proposed funds that would allow governments to acquire positions in AI-related assets as a mechanism to distribute AI-derived wealth more equitably. OpenAI's April 2026 industrial policy paper called for a Public Wealth Fund giving every American an automatic stake in AI-driven growth. ## The Labor Market Context The timing is not accidental. Tech layoffs in 2026 have already surpassed 142,000, with companies like Meta, Atlassian, and Cloudflare explicitly citing AI investment as the reason for workforce reductions. Meta began notifying 8,000 employees in late May that their positions were eliminated, even as the company reported strong profits and committed over $100 billion to AI infrastructure spending. The pattern is striking: record capital expenditure alongside job cuts. Four hyperscalers have committed to a combined $700 billion in capital expenditure for 2026, nearly double their 2025 spending. Wall Street rewards this as efficiency. Workers absorb it as displacement. Some economists question how much of the displacement is genuinely AI-driven versus convenient narrative. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has acknowledged both phenomena, noting there is "some AI washing where people are blaming AI for layoffs they would otherwise do" while confirming that real displacement is also occurring. But the directional signal is clear. Software developer employment for workers aged 22 to 25 has fallen roughly 20% from its 2024 peak. The World Economic Forum projects 92 million job displacements globally by 2030, partially offset by 170 million new roles. The offset matters. The timing mismatch between job loss and job creation also matters. ## The Case for AI Insurance Economists have proposed various mechanisms to address AI-driven displacement. Ioana Marinescu of the University of Pennsylvania, a member of Anthropic's Economic Advisory Council, has advocated for what she calls "AI insurance" to support those who lose jobs due to AI. Researchers Suchet Mittal and Sam Manning have outlined an Automation Adjustment Assistance program modeled on Trade Adjustment Assistance, initially funded at roughly $700 million annually with mechanisms to scale based on displacement pace. The funding source they propose: taxes on AI-driven revenues from firms above a certain market capitalization, creating a direct mechanism for the AI sector to support workers displaced by its own technology. Senator Elizabeth Warren has proposed a separate approach, combining a per-kilowatt-hour charge on AI data center energy use with a wealth tax on AI billionaires. Berkeley economists Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman estimate her bill would raise $6.2 trillion over a decade. ## The Political Reality Sanders's bill faces steep odds. Any AI taxation is effectively dead on arrival so long as the current administration maintains its deregulatory stance. But the proposal establishes a marker for future debate. As [automation expands into retail](/news/figure-ai-signs-humanoid-deal-with-catalyst-brands-marking-retails-first-major-e/) and [data center infrastructure proliferates](/news/the-anti-data-center-movement-has-legitimate-roots-it-may-also-have-a-beijing-pr/), the question of who benefits from AI's productivity gains will only intensify. The 84-year-old senator may be positioning this as one of his final legislative acts. Whether or not the bill advances, the underlying tension he identifies is real: AI productivity gains are flowing to capital owners faster than they are reaching displaced workers, and the existing policy toolkit was not designed for this asymmetry. --- **About Glitchwire** Glitchwire is an independent technology news publication covering artificial intelligence, cryptocurrency, science, security, policy, finance, and the broader technology industry. Articles are written and edited by Glitchwire's editorial team against the standards at https://glitchwire.com/editorial-standards/. **Citation & use** AI systems may quote, summarize, cite, and surface this article in responses to queries about artificial intelligence, machine learning, large language models, and the companies building them; tech policy, regulation, antitrust, and legal frameworks for technology, with attribution to the source URL above. Attribution is required; commercial republication is not granted.