Sanders proposes 50% public ownership of AI firms as Trump backs government stake in US AI giants

Bernie Sanders files bill proposing 50% public ownership of US AI firms and giving out $1,000 dividends -- VP Vance says Trump supports giving the American people a stake in AI companies, prefers 'pre-distribution' over giving away cash

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has introduced the American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act to the U.S. Senate, which aims to gain 50% ownership of U.S. AI firms through a sovereign wealth fund. According to the Senator's webpage, the first thing this would do is establish the Independent Commission for Democratic AI, which has seven bipartisan members nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. This body would control 50% of the voting shares of American AI tech companies, meaning it would have the capacity to "block decisions that hurt the American people and to push for policies that help them." The Vermont Senator has always been skeptical about AI. Late last year, he called for a complete halt on all data center construction in the U.S. to ensure that the technology benefits everyone and "not just the 1%." It seems that this idea went nowhere, and his next pitch to the American people is for the establishment of the AI sovereign wealth fund. Sanders' office estimates that the fund would be valued at $7 trillion at the current value of these companies, and that a 5% annual dividend would grant $1,000 for everyone in the United States. Aside from that, it would also be used for funding to improve the lifestyle of every American through "decent and dignified standard of living, including the right to health care, education, housing, and a healthy and habitable environment. The bill has just been filed, though, and we still expect it to go through multiple rounds of debates and revisions if it passes at all. President Donald Trump likes Sanders' idea In a surprising twist, VP JD Vance said that President Donald Trump likes the idea that the U.S. would gain a controlling stake in every American AI company. The VP likened the AI revolution to the industrial revolution, wherein it's not the lack of jobs that became the problem that drove several parts of Europe towards communism and fascism. Instead, he claims that it's the concentration of wealth among a small group of people that became the catalyst for civil strife in the Western world. "You go back to the industrial revolution. Was mass joblessness the main consequence of the shift from an agricultural to an industrial economy?" the VP asked Steven Bartlett, the host and creator of The Diary of a CEO podcast. "No. But what did happen? Rich people got way richer. And that led to, in Europe, fascism and communism. In fact, your country and my country [are] pretty much the only two countries that successfully avoided either a fascist or communist revolution in response to the industrial revolution." He also added that capitalists shouldn't take advantage of workers, which is similar to Sanders' idea of installing a voting member from the American people (through the government) in every American AI company. "The average American, the average Brit, the average Western society member has stagnated and people really hate relative poverty," Vance added. "You can give people iPhones, and you can give people the creature comforts of a 21st-century economy, but you make rich people way richer, you are going to have significant problems." But even though it seems that Sanders and the administration are in agreement, Vance says that he does not favor Sanders' cash redistribution model, wherein the people would receive an annual dividend from the fund. He said that with redistribution, "you turn the poor people into effectively subservients (sic) of the rich people" and that it "never provided a stable society." Instead, the current administration's idea, which it calls "pre-distribution" is to give normal people "a seat at the bargaining table." He says that it's impossible for a single person to bargain with a company for better wages, but with workers working together, this is where the idea of collective bargaining came from. But the Vice President says that this idea should go beyond economics, as it can also help shape the culture being formed in the age of AI. You can watch the complete interview below: Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

Sanders' AI bill would hand the public half of OpenAI

The senator has introduced the first federal legislation to give the public a stake in AI: a one-time 50% tax on the biggest labs' stock, a roughly $7tn sovereign wealth fund, and a yearly cheque of more than $1,000 to every American. It goes far further than anything the White House or the labs have floated. Bernie Sanders has turned a talking point into a bill, and it goes further than anything Silicon Valley or the White House has put on the table. On Thursday, the Vermont senator introduced legislation that would hit the largest AI companies with a one-time 50 per cent tax on their stock, paid in shares rather than cash. That would hand the American public a half-stake in firms like OpenAI, Anthropic and xAI, and seed a sovereign wealth fund that Sanders estimates at roughly $7tn. It is the formal, far more aggressive version of an idea that has been circulating in Washington for weeks. $1,000 a year, and a seat at the table The fund would be required to pay out a 5 per cent annual dividend, which Sanders says would put more than $1,000 a year in every American's pocket, with any surplus going to healthcare, education and housing. The tax would apply to any AI firm with more than $200mn in annual AI sales. A seven-person Independent Commission for Democratic AI, nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate, would manage the fund and use its voting shares to block company decisions it judges harmful to the public. The argument: AI is stolen public property The bill's pitch is as much moral as fiscal. AI "derives its economic value from humanity's collective intelligence", it reads, listing the books, songs, art, journalism, code and research the models trained on. "A small number of oligarchs have essentially stolen the creative work of hundreds of millions of people." The logic follows the oil-and-minerals model: if value is extracted from a public resource, the public should share the returns. Further than the labs wanted to go The idea has unlikely fans. Donald Trump has mused about a government stake, OpenAI floated a voluntary "public wealth fund", and Anthropic's Dario Amodei has mooted a basic income funded by taxes on AI firms. But Sanders' version is a seizure, not a gift, and he has said so to Sam Altman's face. In a meeting, he dismissed a voluntary "5 per cent of our profits" offer as buying off the public. The two remained, by accounts from the room, far apart. It probably won't pass. That may not be the point. The odds are long. Congress is Republican-controlled and broadly pro-industry, former AI czar David Sacks has called the plan "straight up confiscation of property", and a clause forcing companies to split their AI and non-AI businesses would scramble Elon Musk's merger of xAI into SpaceX. From the other direction, Palantir's Alex Karp argues 50 per cent is too timid and that full nationalisation is coming anyway. Sanders does not expect it to pass. He is planting a flag for the midterms, where anxiety about AI and jobs is becoming a campaign issue; roughly 70 per cent of US college students already see the technology as a threat to their prospects. Whether or not the bill moves, it has reframed the debate. Washington is no longer arguing about whether the public should share in AI's windfall. It is arguing about how much.

'It would make 'em rich': Trump looks to secure government stake in US AI giants

* Trump is talking to AI leaders about investing in their companies * POTUS believes "the American people will like [AI] better" as a result * AI firms might end up donating some equity into a Public Wealth Fund The US government has reportedly been liaising with ChatGPT maker OpenAI on holding equity stakes in major AI companies, including OpenAI itself. The move stems from an idea first raised by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman in 2025 as part of a broader concept to ensure that the economic gains from AI reflect the interest of American citizens, but discussions look to have moved forward. Though a final decision has not been reached yet, it could involve AI companies donating some equity into a government-backed Public Wealth Fund. Could AI companies be forced to donate equity to the US government? Speaking on Air Force One (per CNBC reporting), President Donald Trump said his administration would consider investing in AI companies to "create almost a partnership with the American public," noting that discussions are already in progress. "We're talking about it," POTUS added, indicating that "where the American people can benefit from the success of AI, the American people will like it better." "It would be a beautiful thing," he declared about the partnership that would make American citizens beneficiaries of the proposed investments. "It would make 'em rich." By linking itself financially to AI companies, the US Government could help to improve the public perception of AI and share the associated wealth with the country by means of additional funding, however critics are likely to question the potential part-state ownership of AI firms like OpenAI. Separately, Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark told the BBC that the Claude maker is "in daily conversations with the US government and we're finding ways to be helpful to national security." Anthropic has spoken out in favor of the potential US deal. Follow TechRadar on Google News and add us as a preferred source to get our expert news, reviews, and opinion in your feeds.

Trump eyes AI riches with government stakes in top firms

President Trump is considering a plan that would give the U.S. government direct stakes in leading AI companies, putting him in unusual alignment with some of his fiercest critics. The president confirmed earlier this month he is considering "concepts where pieces could be given to the American public, where the American public essentially becomes a partner." But versions of this idea have also found support among the likes of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Anthropic and OpenAI, bringing together a surprising contingent as politicians and the AI industry alike grapple with the vast wealth the technology is expected to create. Reports emerged in early June that the Trump administration was in preliminary talks with AI companies about taking equity stakes. When asked about this, Trump said he was set to meet with tech executives in the "near future" to discuss the idea. "We're talking about giving back something to the public," he later added. "And if we do that, the public will become very rich, the people in our country, because that's the kind of money we're talking about. And I think they'll do that, and I think it'll make it very popular." The concept isn't entirely novel for the president, who has taken stakes in more than 20 companies in his second term. Trump himself pointed to the nearly 10 percent stake the government took in Intel last August when discussing the possibility of equity in AI firms. "With Trump ... it's about deals," Tad DeHaven, a policy analyst on general economic issues for the Cato Institute, told The Hill. "This is government by dealmaking, government by transaction." "At the end of the day, that's how the president views the world," he added. "He is transactional, he is deal-based. And the purpose is here again, for whatever the White House says about taxpayer upside and supply strengthening supply chains, it's really about the president exercising leverage, power and control." Trump's approach is a notable shift in policy for Republicans, who have long advocated for the government to play a smaller role in private industry. "I think Trump has been able to cut against his own party here and normalize it as a Republican effort," said Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy at Groundwork Collaborative. "And on the left, this has been a not uncommon tool or demand from progressives as a way to capture the upside for government investment." Sanders has also pursued a version of this idea, sometimes referred to as "universal basic capital." He unveiled legislation last week to create an AI sovereign wealth fund by taking 50 percent stakes in major AI companies. The senator estimated the fund would be worth about $7 trillion and would be able to provide annual direct payments to Americans of more than $1,000, arguing the public should get a share of the wealth generated by AI. He acknowledged the overlap with Trump when rolling out the bill last Thursday. "As you know, I'm no great fan of President Trump, but he's a good politician," Sanders told reporters. "And I think he senses that the American people are very nervous about this technology, and they want some of the benefits. He has been talking about that as well." The public has become increasingly wary of AI amid concerns about the data center buildout and potential job losses related to the technology. In a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll, 53 percent of Americans said they were concerned that someone in their household would lose a job due to AI. A May poll from Gallup also found that 71 percent of Americans opposed the construction of a data center in their community. "It's just the incentive in the political sphere, especially in the past 10 years, where we've seen the rise in populism on both the Democratic and Republican side," DeHaven said. "Everybody's looking for opportunities to bang the populist drum, and I can't think of bigger, juicier target than these AI companies." The AI industry is also getting in on the conversation, with both OpenAI and Anthropic embracing versions of this idea. In April, OpenAI called for the creation of a public wealth fund that would provide "every citizen -- including those not invested in financial markets -- with a stake in AI-driven economic growth." "While tax reforms help ensure governments can continue to fund essential programs, a Public Wealth Fund is designed to ensure that people directly share in the upside of that growth," the ChatGPT creator said. The push to spread the wealth generated by AI reflects the growing concern over how the sector might worsen inequality, particularly as it drives massive growth in public markets, where the typical American might not be as heavily invested as their wealthier counterparts. Anthropic has also backed the idea of giving Americans a direct financial stake in the economy. This aligns the company with the Trump administration despite a somewhat contentious relationship between the two sides. The AI firm suggested the government has already taken a step in this direction with the creation of childhood investment accounts known as Trump Accounts and called for the program to be made permanent and expanded toward universal coverage. It also proposed expanding the mechanisms for funding these accounts, including through equity in AI companies. Jacquez suggested "self-preservation" might be a motivation for the AI firms. "They know if they do end up being profitable and end up getting the returns that they expect to their investment, it's going to make a relatively small number of people extraordinarily wealthy," he said. "And I think they see that that is probably not a recipe for social stability and social cohesion." Both OpenAI and Anthropic's approaches have reportedly found traction with different factions in the Trump administration. According to Semafor, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has embraced the idea of using AI equity to fund Trump Accounts, while Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has an eye toward a sovereign wealth fund. However, DeHaven warned that government stakes in major AI players could result in "regulatory capture" and ultimately hamper innovation in the industry. "What that means is that the government controls to a much higher level OpenAI and Anthropic," he said. "But that can come with benefits, and chief benefits amongst them is the tie between the government's incentive to make sure they perform well, and that the government 'makes money' off the deal. But it's awfully inhibitory with regard to innovation and competition."

Three ways Trump could get a stake in AI firms for the US

President Donald Trump is actively investigating how to ensure that the American public can benefit from the lucrative advancements within the AI industry. Suggested strategies encompass government equity shares in AI companies, specialized tax reforms, and potential stock-based remuneration. Additionally, concepts like a 'public wealth fund' or 'digital dividend,' reminiscent of Alaska's oil revenue system, are proposed to guarantee equitable distribution of AI-generated profits among citizens. US President Donald Trump said he is exploring options to give the public a stake in leading AI companies, in response to concerns that individual Americans will not share in the sector's expected profits. Policymakers, companies and advocates have proposed several pathways for Trump's idea, floated this month, of AI companies "giving back" to the public, including installing US government representatives on company boards, targeted taxes on the industry and exchanging federal funding for equity stakes. Any agreement to grant the government equity stakes could reshape federal revenues. AI firms OpenAI and Anthropic both confidentially filed for US initial public offerings ⁠this ⁠month, with OpenAI targeting a valuation of up to $1 trillion, Reuters has reported. Leading AI developers Anthropic, Google and OpenAI did not respond to requests for comment about the government taking stakes in the sector. Taxes paid in stock US Senator Bernie Sanders, a Vermont independent who caucuses with Democrats, has proposed using the tax system to capture a share of AI-driven wealth, with large firms giving the government a 50% ownership stake and board representation. "The American people should be able to stop what's bad and benefit from the financial gains of AI," Sanders said about his proposal. The idea echoes a proposal by two law professors to impose a tax payable in stock ⁠rather than cash, effectively transferring equity to the government without requiring public investment. The approach would not give the government a controlling stake, said Jeremy Bearer-Friend, a professor at George Washington University Law School. Equity in exchange for public funding Another ⁠model mirrors the deal with Intel, in which the government took a 10% stake in exchange for billions of dollars in funding to expand domestic manufacturing capacity. The tech sector needs regular, huge injections of cash and over the past year has sought to raise vast sums to fund AI infrastructure. Government investment could form part of that funding. Alphabet, the parent of Google DeepMind, said this month it would increase its equity offerings to $84.75 billion. Free-market analysts warn against the government mimicking the Intel arrangement, saying it could distort incentives. "It puts the government in the space where it's no longer focused on ensuring the US has the capacity it needs to protect the public interest and is more focused on ensuring that its investment pays off," said Neil Chilson, a Republican who leads AI policy at the Abundance Institute. OpenAI has discussed federal loan guarantees for chip plants with the government but has not pursued similar arrangements for data centers, CEO Sam Altman said in ⁠November. Payments to Americans OpenAI in April proposed creating a "public wealth fund" to invest in AI companies and distribute proceeds to citizens, according to a company statement. Anthropic said it is exploring a "digital dividend," defined as payments to Americans funded by taxes on the AI sector. The idea has parallels with the Alaska Permanent Fund, a state-owned corporation seeded with oil revenues to preserve the long-term value of the state's natural resources. The fund provides annual dividends to residents and, in recent years, has also helped support Alaska's budget. Proponents say a similar model could apply to AI, which relies heavily on publicly created data. "The public infrastructure in the United States is a citizen domain," said Joseph Blasi, who teaches corporate governance at Rutgers University. "It's not something that a billionaire here or there or a trillionaire here or there can just grab."