Artificial intelligence is creating immense wealth at a speed few technologies have managed before. Companies like OpenAI, Anthropic and xAI are attracting billions of dollars in investments, while their products are becoming part of everyday life. But as these firms grow richer, a bigger question is beginning to pop up that is who should benefit from the AI revolution?
For Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, the answer is simple. If AI systems are built using the knowledge, creativity and work of millions of people, then the profits generated by these systems should not be concentrated in the hands of a few companies and investors. Instead, he argues, ordinary Americans should receive a direct share of that wealth.
I will soon be introducing a bill to give the public a 50% ownership stake in the largest AI companies in America.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) June 2, 2026
This would guarantee that the trillions created by AI are used to improve the lives of all of us — and block oligarch decisions that harm the American people. pic.twitter.com/y3ERWOsRfs
To turn that idea into reality, Sanders has announced plans to introduce a new piece of legislation called the American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act. The proposal is one of the most ambitious AI-related policy ideas to emerge in the United States so far, and it could fundamentally change how the country thinks about ownership in the AI age.
Sanders wrote in a New York Times essay that “Since AI is built on the collective knowledge of humanity, the wealth it generates must benefit humanity. Not just Mr. Musk, Mr. Altman, Dario Amodei and other moguls whose companies are positioned to dominate the industry. Not just venture capitalists in Silicon Valley or money managers on Wall Street who undoubtedly see AI as the next great wealth-extracting machine.”
He said he would “soon” introduce the American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act. The proposal would create a sovereign wealth fund funded through a one-time 50 percent tax on the stock of major AI companies, which Sanders described as “far more valuable” than their profits. Sanders reiterated his argument in a video posted on X, calling AI “the most transformational technology in the history of the world”.
“Who will own and control that future? Who will benefit from it, and who will be hurt by it? Will AI be used to make life better for working families? Will it enrich our quality of life? Will it help us eliminate poverty, extend life expectancies and solve the climate crisis?” he said.
He also argued that AI has been built on the “collective intelligence” of humanity, drawing on books, art, research and other forms of human knowledge.
The idea behind Sanders’ proposal
What Sanders is recommending, AI companies have built their products using enormous amounts of human-created content, including books, articles, research papers, music, artwork, software code and other forms of knowledge.
According to Sanders, much of this material was used without direct permission, acknowledgement or compensation. Because AI systems depend on the collective output of society, he argues that society deserves a share of the financial rewards generated by these technologies.
His proposed solution is not a traditional tax on company profits. Instead, Sanders wants the federal government to receive a one-time transfer of stock from the country’s largest AI companies. Those shares would then be placed into a publicly owned investment fund designed to benefit all Americans.
How the AI sovereign wealth fund would work
The proposed sovereign wealth fund would operate somewhat like a giant investment account owned by the public. Under Sanders’ plan, major AI companies would transfer 50% of their equity to the federal government. In return, the government would hold shares in these firms and become a major stakeholder in their future success.
As the companies grow and become more valuable, the public fund would also grow in value. Any revenue generated through dividends or other returns could then be distributed directly to Americans.
Sanders says that in the early stages, the money could be paid out to citizens as cash distributions. Over time, if the fund becomes large enough, the returns could also help finance broader public programmes such as healthcare, education and housing.
The government would also get a seat at the table
The proposal is not only about sharing profits. Because the government would own a large portion of these companies, it would also receive voting rights and board representation. Sanders argues that this would give the public a stronger voice in how AI companies operate and how decisions are made. Supporters believe this could introduce greater accountability into an industry that is developing rapidly and has enormous influence over jobs, information and society.
Why Sanders believes the public deserves a stake
Sanders’ argument goes beyond economics. He sees AI as a technology built on decades of collective human effort. Every news article, scientific paper, computer program, photograph and book that helped train AI systems represents work done by people who are not sharing in the industry’s profits.
In his view, AI companies are benefiting from a vast public resource. Therefore, some of the value created by these companies should flow back to the people whose work helped make the technology possible.
The proposal draws inspiration from existing models
Although the idea sounds radical, sovereign wealth funds already exist in several parts of the world. One of the best-known examples is Norway’s sovereign wealth fund, which invests the country’s oil revenues and has become one of the largest investment funds globally.
In the United States, Alaska operates the Permanent Fund Dividend programme. The state invests revenue from oil production and distributes a portion of the earnings directly to residents through annual payments.
Sanders believes a similar model could work for AI-generated wealth. Instead of oil or natural resources, the fund’s value would come from ownership stakes in leading AI companies.
Interestingly, some AI leaders have discussed similar ideas. One of the more surprising aspects of Sanders’ proposal is that parts of the AI industry have previously explored related concepts.
OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has spoken about creating mechanisms that would allow the public to benefit from AI-driven economic growth. Anthropic has also discussed the possibility of sovereign wealth funds holding stakes in AI-related businesses.
Elon Musk has separately suggested that direct payments may eventually be needed if AI significantly reduces the number of jobs available to humans. However, there is a major difference between discussing wealth-sharing in principle and supporting a mandatory transfer of half a company’s ownership to the government. That distinction is likely to become a key point of debate if Sanders introduces the legislation.
Several important questions remain unanswered
While the proposal has generated attention, many details are still unclear. One major question involves profitability. Some of the world’s most prominent AI companies are still losing money despite their enormous valuations. If these businesses do not become profitable quickly, the sovereign wealth fund may not generate meaningful returns for years.
Another challenge is deciding which companies would fall under the law. Firms such as Microsoft, Google and Amazon have major AI operations, but AI represents only part of their overall business. Sanders has acknowledged that determining how to handle such companies could be complicated. There are also questions about how investors, courts and the broader technology industry would respond to a mandatory 50% equity transfer.
The timing is significant
The proposal comes at a moment when AI companies are preparing for potentially massive public market debuts. Anthropic, OpenAI and SpaceX-linked AI businesses are among the most closely watched companies in the technology sector. Investors expect these firms to reach enormous valuations if they eventually go public.
At the same time, major technology companies are spending hundreds of billions of dollars on AI infrastructure, including data centres and computing resources. The financial stakes are growing rapidly, making debates about ownership and wealth distribution increasingly relevant. Whether Sanders’ proposal becomes law is another question entirely. The plan would face major political, legal and economic hurdles before it could ever be implemented.