New Delhi: Artificial intelligence shouldn’t belong to a handful of billionaires but to everyone, according to US senator Bernie Sanders. He now wants to turn that idea into law through the American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act, a bill he is gearing up to introduce. The proposal has fired up debate on whether such a measure is a much-needed course correction or a path to “wrecking” innovation and the US economy.
The senator from Vermont and a two-time former presidential candidate, Sanders outlined the proposal in a guest essay for The New York Times on 1 June, as well as in a video he posted on X. The Act would require AI behemoths such as OpenAI, Anthropic, and xAI to transfer 50 per cent of their stock into a public sovereign wealth fund. This, he said, would ensure that the trillions of dollars potentially generated by artificial intelligence would benefit ordinary Americans rather than a small group of tech elites.
“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,” Sanders wrote in the NYT essay.
He added that he would “soon” introduce the American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act. If passed, it would create a sovereign wealth fund through a one-time 50 per cent tax on the stock—which he called “far more valuable” than profits—of major AI companies.
Sanders reiterated his points in an X video, where he described AI as “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, also pointing out that the technology had been built on the “collective intelligence” of humanity, from books to art to research.
I will soon be introducing a bill to give the public a 50% ownership stake in the largest AI companies in America.
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
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) June 2, 2026
Sanders has repeatedly argued that the debate over AI is ultimately about power and control. Speaking last November at a forum hosted by Georgetown University’s Institute of Politics and Public Service, he said the key issue is “who controls it and who benefits from it” — a theme that also underpins his latest proposal for public ownership.
Also Read: Should we leave writing to AI? Even literary prize juries can’t identify good writing
‘Socialist grab’ vs ‘balance of wealth’
Sanders’ post on X has drawn over 3,000 comments, with supporters endorsing it as a much-needed move to prevent AI concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a few companies. Others criticised the proposal as unrealistic and harmful to innovation.
Noted cognitive scientist Gary Marcus, author of Taming Silicon Valley: How We Can Ensure That AI Works for Us, called it the “wrong solution, right problem”. While he was sceptical about “this kind of nationalization by fiat”, he added that he was glad Sanders was broadening the conversation.
Not convinced that this kind of nationalization by fiat is at all the right way to go (and for that matter don’t expect the current breed of technology to generate trillions), but I am glad that Sanders is broadening the conversation.
Even if his approach is not the right way,… https://t.co/dg0AaXGAvq
— Gary Marcus (@GaryMarcus) June 2, 2026
Others were more enthusiastic in their backing of the idea.
“We need drastic measures like this to tip the balance of wealth back in the direction of the majority,” wrote commenter @PlauDD.
Detractors also registered their presence strongly, some criticising the “Communist” nature of the proposal and comparing Sanders to Stalin.
“Ownership is the thing you buy or build with your own capital and your own risk…. You are a man who built nothing yet wants a controlling share of everything. You’re a cancer on this country,” wrote @gerlarrea.
Others, such as @austinmolt, said making AI companies hand over half their equity could damage the entire economy.
“This socialist grab will slow growth and hand our tech edge to our opponents,” he wrote.
@BernieSanders
This will wreck our economy. Forcing AI companies to hand over 50% equity to the government is straight-up theft of private innovation. AI is exploding because of risk-takers and entrepreneurs… not bureaucrats. This socialist grab will slow growth and hand our…
— Austin Molt (@austinmolt) June 2, 2026
Many also pointed out that the idea was not realistic and would merely end up slowing the progress of US companies in AI.
“Nothing will retard the success of AI companies like government control. You can’t install a public toilet facility without millions of dollars and years of red tape. How did the expansion of internet access to remote communities turn out? You’re absurd,” wrote @ts_kane.
(Edited by Asavari Singh)