You make them partners in this revolution. It would be something beautiful.
Trump proposes federal government partnership with AI labs, acquiring equity stakes to ensure Americans benefit from AI wealth creation and address voter anxieties. Proposal echoes Bernie Sanders' 50% tax on AI company shares; tech leaders warn of corporate-government fusion risks and potential authoritarian control systems.
- Trump proposes federal government acquire equity stakes in OpenAI, Anthropic, and xAI
- Bernie Sanders proposed 50% tax on AI company shares to fund sovereign wealth fund
- Anthropic and SpaceX expected to go public within months; each projected at trillion-dollar valuations
- Midterm elections in five months; AI and employment impact are key voter concerns
- Sam Altman has pitched government ownership concept to policymakers; OpenAI drafted public wealth fund proposal in April
Trump suggests the US government acquire equity stakes in major AI firms like OpenAI to address voter concerns about technology, positioning it as a partnership benefiting Americans amid growing Maga movement skepticism.
Donald Trump has proposed that the federal government acquire equity stakes in major artificial intelligence companies—including OpenAI, Anthropic, and xAI—framing the move as a partnership that would ensure ordinary Americans benefit from the wealth generated by AI technology. Speaking to reporters on Friday, the president said he had discussed the arrangement with leading AI laboratories in recent days, describing it as a model where the federal government "essentially becomes a partner" with these firms. Representatives from the three companies are expected to visit the White House next week to discuss the proposal.
The idea arrives amid intensifying backlash against AI within Trump's own political movement. Republican strategists have grown increasingly concerned about polling showing rising anxiety about artificial intelligence among voters in the Maga base, driven by fears of widespread job losses and threats to child safety. Some Republican lawmakers have attempted to introduce legislation restricting the industry, though the White House has resisted these efforts. With midterm elections five months away and voter discontent about economic management threatening Republican control of Congress, the administration appears to view government ownership as a way to reframe AI as a shared national asset rather than a threat.
The proposal echoes a recent push by Senator Bernie Sanders, who announced plans to introduce legislation imposing a 50 percent tax on AI company shares, with proceeds funding a sovereign wealth fund. Sanders argued the measure would "guarantee that the trillions created by AI are used to improve all our lives." Trump acknowledged on Friday that Sanders's idea had resonated with some of his own voters and suggested that positioning Americans as partners in the AI revolution would calm growing public hostility toward the technology. "You make them partners in this revolution," he said. "It would be something beautiful."
But the proposal has already drawn sharp criticism from influential figures in Silicon Valley and within Trump's own circle. David Sacks, a venture capitalist and Trump adviser, warned that government ownership of AI companies would accelerate a dangerous merger of corporate and state power. "Nationalizing AI will speed up the corporate-government fusion we're already heading toward," Sacks wrote before Trump's announcement. He raised the specter of an American version of China's social credit system, arguing that if the U.S. defeats China in the AI race only to end up with authoritarian control mechanisms at home, the victory would be hollow. Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir, similarly cautioned AI leaders this week that "the momentum is on the side of people who want to nationalize" them, urging his peers to take the political pressure seriously.
Sam Altman, OpenAI's chief executive, has actually been exploring the concept himself. According to sources with direct knowledge, Altman has advocated for government acquisition of a stake in ChatGPT's creator and pitched the idea to policymakers. In April, OpenAI drafted proposals for a U.S. public wealth fund that would give citizens "a stake in the economic growth driven by AI." Altman has since discussed these proposals with Sanders and was in Washington this week meeting with lawmakers and Trump administration officials. The details of how much the government should own in American AI laboratories remain to be worked out, but the conversations are clearly advancing.
The timing is significant. Anthropic and SpaceX are expected to go public within months in major Wall Street debuts, with OpenAI likely to follow. Each company is projected to command trillion-dollar valuations, making any government stake potentially expensive. The government has already begun acquiring equity in strategically important companies as part of Trump's "America First" industrial policy, including stakes in Intel and startups focused on rare earth materials and quantum computing. But the scale of AI valuations presents a different challenge—and a different political opportunity. By positioning government ownership as a way to democratize AI wealth rather than regulate the industry, Trump appears to be betting he can neutralize voter anxiety while keeping the tech industry largely on his side.
Notable Quotes
The government essentially becomes a partner with these firms, ensuring Americans benefit from AI wealth creation— President Trump
Nationalizing AI will accelerate the corporate-government fusion we're already heading toward, risking an American version of China's social credit system— David Sacks, venture capitalist and Trump adviser
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why would Trump frame this as a partnership rather than just regulation or taxation?
Because regulation and taxation sound like government saying no. Partnership sounds like government saying yes—and making sure you get a piece of what's being built. It's a political move, not an economic one.
But doesn't government ownership of AI companies actually raise the concerns people have—that AI will be controlled by power?
That's exactly what Sacks is arguing. He's saying if you wanted to build an American social credit system, government ownership of the AI infrastructure is how you'd do it. The irony is that the thing people fear about AI—that it concentrates power—gets worse if the power is also the government.
So why is Altman, the guy running OpenAI, actually interested in this?
Because he sees the political wind shifting. If regulation is coming anyway, maybe it's better to shape it yourself. And if the government owns a piece, maybe it becomes an investor with skin in the game rather than a regulator with a club.
What does this mean for the midterm elections?
It means Trump is trying to solve a real problem: his voters are scared of AI, and he needs them to vote Republican in five months. This proposal lets him say he's protecting ordinary Americans from tech billionaires. Whether it actually does that is a different question.
Could this actually happen?
The companies are going public soon with trillion-dollar valuations. The government would need enormous amounts of money to buy meaningful stakes. It's more likely to be a symbolic ownership—enough to claim partnership, not enough to actually control anything.