OpenAI has published a 13-page policy document titled "Industrial Policy for the Intelligence Age." CEO Sam Altman argues that AI risks are too large for any single company to handle. He says the US government must act urgently to prepare for the age of superintelligence. The document proposes public wealth funds, robot taxes, a four-day work week, and government-backed energy infrastructure. Critics accuse the company of lobbying for regulations that would benefit its own position.
What OpenAI Is Proposing
The paper covers three goals: distributing AI-driven prosperity more broadly, building safeguards against systemic risks, and ensuring widespread access to AI tools.
On economics, OpenAI proposes shifting the tax burden from labor to capital. As AI reshapes work, corporate profits will grow while payroll tax revenue shrinks. OpenAI suggests higher taxes on corporate income and AI-driven returns. That position puts it at odds with some of its own investors, including Marc Andreessen, who backed Trump partly over capital gains tax concerns.
The company also floats a robot tax. Companies would pay the same taxes for an AI system as for the human worker it replaced. And it proposes a Public Wealth Fund. This would give Americans an automatic stake in AI companies and AI infrastructure, distributing returns directly to citizens.
The Safety Proposals
OpenAI acknowledges that AI dangers go beyond job displacement. Risks include misuse by governments, cyberattacks, biological threats, and systems operating beyond human control. The company proposes containment plans for dangerous AI, new oversight bodies, and safeguards against high-risk uses.
Altman warned that next-generation AI models will help scientists make discoveries. Individuals will be able to do the work of entire groups. He described AI as becoming a utility like electricity. Costs would vary based on usage, with higher bills for heavier use.
The document also calls for government support of energy expansion. OpenAI argues that data centers should pay their own way. Households should not subsidize them. Critics note this is hard to reconcile with the company's earlier hints about government backstops for infrastructure financing.
The Criticism
The paper has drawn sharp criticism. A TechPolicy Press analysis called it corporate diplomacy designed to benefit OpenAI. The document proposes controls on powerful AI models. Those controls would conveniently protect OpenAI's frontier position. Smaller competitors would operate below the regulatory threshold.
The timing is also notable. OpenAI president Greg Brockman and other tech billionaires have funded super PACs supporting light-touch AI policies. OpenAI plans to open a Washington, D.C. hub called the OpenAI Workshop. It will issue grants to AI policy researchers. Critics see these moves as attempts to influence the regulatory conversation.
The Nationalization Question
Altman's response to nationalization questions was revealing. He argued the US needs to achieve superintelligence before its rivals. That effort probably would not work as a government project. The framing positions OpenAI as essential to national security. But it also argues against government control — a stance that serves the company's commercial interests.
White House AI advisor David Sacks was blunt: there would be no federal bailout for AI. Altman then said OpenAI does not want government guarantees for its data centers. This walked back earlier suggestions from CFO Sarah Friar about government backstops.
Why It Matters
OpenAI's document is the most detailed attempt by a frontier AI company to shape its regulatory environment. Whether the proposals genuinely protect workers or primarily lock in OpenAI's advantages will be debated in Washington.
The era of unregulated growth is ending. The question is who writes the rules. And whether the companies building the technology should design the framework that governs it.
