OpenAI proposes 'Industrial Policy for the Intelligence Age'

OpenAI published a 13-page policy document, “Industrial Policy for the Intelligence Age: Ideas to Keep People First,” proposing government responses to the labour disruption it expects from advancing AI capability. The company framed the exercise explicitly as a conversation-starter rather than a set of recommendations: “these ideas are intentionally early and exploratory… a starting point for discussion that we invite others to build on, refine, challenge, or choose among through the democratic process.”

The document’s most concrete proposals fell into two groups. On tax and redistribution, it suggested “exploring new approaches such as taxes related to automated labor,” shifting the tax base from wages toward capital gains and corporate income, and creating a “Public Wealth Fund” — modelled loosely on Alaska’s oil-revenue fund — that would give every citizen a direct stake in AI-driven growth regardless of whether they held financial assets. On work itself, it proposed government-backed pilots of a 32-hour, four-day working week at unchanged pay, and “adaptive safety nets” that would automatically expand unemployment and wage-insurance benefits once measured job displacement crossed preset thresholds, then phase back down.

A second section addressed governance of frontier AI itself, proposing expanded federal auditing capacity through the Center for AI Standards and Innovation, incident-reporting requirements for near-misses as well as actual harms, and “mission-aligned corporate governance” — a call, notably, for AI companies including OpenAI to adopt public-benefit structures with binding philanthropic commitments.

We should aim for a future where superintelligence benefits everyone… If AI winds up controlled by, and benefiting only a few, while most people lack agency and access to AI-driven opportunity, we will have failed to deliver on its promise.

— OpenAI, “Industrial Policy for the Intelligence Age”

The document arrived as OpenAI faced growing public pressure over AI’s effect on employment and ahead of an anticipated public offering, and it committed the company to a small fellowship and grants programme, plus a Washington policy workshop opening in May, to keep the conversation going. Coverage was mixed: reporting noted the proposals were unusually specific for an industry statement — naming a wealth fund and an automation tax rather than gesturing at “responsible AI” — while some commentary judged parts of the document more aspirational than actionable.