Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has introduced legislation to impose a 50 percent "ownership tax" on major AI companies like Anthropic and OpenAI, which would transfer half of these firms to federal control and fund a universal basic income program. The proposal, detailed in an opinion piece published June 11, 2026 by The Heartland Institute, represents what critics call an unprecedented expansion of government control over the private tech sector. Sanders frames the plan as reclaiming wealth generated by AI, which he argues is "built on the collective knowledge of humanity," from billionaires like Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos, and Mark Zuckerberg.
The senator's "American AI Sovereign Wealth Fund Act" would give the federal government voting shares and equal board representation at targeted AI companies, allowing Washington to "block decisions that hurt our citizens and to push for policies that help them." Revenue from the fund would provide direct payments to all Americans, with Sanders predicting "billions, if not trillions, of dollars" would eventually guarantee "every man, woman and child in our country has a decent and dignified standard of living, including healthcare, education and housing." The proposal builds on Sanders's earlier March 2026 call for a federal moratorium on AI data center development, which would halt construction of the infrastructure needed to train and run AI systems nationwide.
According to the Heartland analysis, Sanders justifies the government takeover by arguing that AI represents "the most sweeping technological revolution in the history of humanity" and that decisions about its future shouldn't rest with "a handful of billionaire Big Tech oligarchs." The report notes that Sanders wants to give the American people "a direct role in determining the future of this technology" through federal control, with the senator declaring "the time has come to reclaim what was stolen from us." Under his framework, Washington bureaucrats would exert control over AI development decisions through their board positions and ownership stakes in the companies.
The Heartland Institute argues that both proposals would cripple American competitiveness in what it describes as an AI arms race with China and Russia. The analysis compares a national halt on data center development to "a national freeze on computer development during the Cold War," warning it would have "slaughtered jobs, stifled innovation, and probably helped the Soviet Union." The report contends that government intervention would transform AI companies into "zombies, not cutting-edge innovators" because political considerations would skew decision-making, causing the fund to produce "less and less wealth" rather than Sanders's promised riches. The critics also warn that the 50 percent ownership threshold could set a precedent for nationalizing oil and gas companies, retail stores, grocery chains, or "any sector in which the government wants a piece of the pie."
The Heartland piece concludes that Sanders's AI nationalization scheme and data center moratorium must be "nipped in the bud" to prevent what it calls a fundamental recalibration of the relationship between public and private sectors. The report warns that "nationalization coupled with top-down, command-and-control economics is the antithesis of the American way" and recommends these policies be "mocked, ridiculed, and outright dismissed for their socialist underpinnings and anti-American postures." The bottom line for critics: handing Washington control over America's AI industry would deliver a crushing blow to innovation and hand China and Russia a strategic advantage they couldn't win on their own.