Sources: US officials discussed the US taking stakes in major AI companies after Sam Altman pitched the idea in 2025; Altman met Bernie Sanders on Wednesday
The talks have been with artificial-intelligence leaders such as OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, who pitched the idea
Wall Street Journal
Context & Ripple Effects
Related coverage traces a shift from Altman’s earlier efforts to assemble exceptionally large pools of private and foreign capital for US AI infrastructure toward discussions of direct US ownership in AI companies. A separate report says OpenAI and the White House have discussed a stake connected to a proposed public-wealth-fund concept.
Altman’s reported meeting with Bernie Sanders places the ownership discussion alongside a policy debate over how gains from AI should be shared; Sanders has separately proposed a fund financed by a tax on large AI-company sales.
First-order effects
OpenAI and other major AI companies involved in the discussions would have to weigh government equity participation as a potential source of capital and political alignment, alongside the governance and disclosure obligations it could bring.
US officials gain a possible mechanism to participate directly in the value created by strategically important AI companies rather than relying only on regulation, procurement, or taxation.
Second-order effects
A government-stake pathway could pressure leading AI firms to clarify whether access to public support or infrastructure is tied to public ownership, potentially changing fundraising calculations for companies seeking very large capital commitments.
The proposal sharpens the contrast between equity-based public participation and Sanders’s tax-financed sovereign-wealth-fund approach, making the distribution of AI returns a more concrete policy choice.
Third-order effects
If these discussions become policy, US AI industrial strategy could move toward a hybrid model in which the state is not only rule-setter and customer but also an investor in selected companies.
That would raise durable questions about how public ownership is governed, how benefits are distributed, and whether state backing concentrates advantage among already-large AI platforms.
The trend: AI’s escalating infrastructure and capital needs are pushing the US debate from supporting the sector through policy toward sharing directly in the ownership and returns of strategic AI firms.
Wall Street Journal confirming our reporting today, with some new details that gov shares in OpenAi could go to Trump account-type program by @AmrithRamkumar & co [image]
I see the idea of AI socialism is back in the news again today. I'll just reiterate what I've said here many times before: The idea of nationalizing AI - whether “hard” (complete govt ownership) or “soft” (equity stakes) nationalization - should be rejected in all its forms. It
SCOOP: US officials have had talks about having government acquire shares in AI giants, sources say Altman has discussed w/ senior officials, including Trump. Did again recently May be *ceding* shares to USG - not a purchase Shares could go 2 dividend https://www.notus.org/...
if this is how the US tries to solve the inequality and revenue challenge, that's really bad news. if it actually works, it's the ultimate regulatory capture, interweaving the US budget and the AI labs' fate. talk about an incentive for backstops and regulatory concessions!
among redistributive solutions, this direct stake concept is uniquely hard to internationalise. USG won't want other countries crowding in, shares are expensive and labs have no incentive to cease them. if this solves redistribution in the US, it pulls up the ladder right after.
Government equity in the AI companies strikes me as the wrong approach. The government should tax and regulate them, and potentially distribute the taxes as a dividend. But ownership risks giving the gov't control outside of public view and potentially the wrong incentives.
This is the road to techno-fascism. These companies will use this to prevent competition, harness all our data and make themselves too big to fail. They will become Big Brother.
This is basically the Bernie proposal. Really never expected that electing Trump would push U.S. govt so far toward actual socialism (not even a judgment call — just surprise).
This means “confiscating” part of the company rather than investing in the company. This is an extraordinarily bad idea that's only been proposed by socialists (Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump).
They're trying to guarantee their own survival by giving Trump motivation to bail them out when they need hundreds of billions of dollars. This is some East India Trading Company shit. The broligarchy is attempting a hostile takeover.
Guy whose company is floundering pitches idea for government to give them giant bags of money. US officials, who are tech stupid and gullible, consider the idea. [embedded post]
While I'm no fan of socialism or arbitrary confiscations of wealth, I can see why Bernie Sanders' proposal (for the government to take a 50% stake in AI companies) resonates, including with many on the right. The CEOs of the leading AI labs have told us repeatedly that they will
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. [video…
(Bloomberg) — President Donald Trump expressed interest in the US government holding equity stakes in leading artificial intelligence developers, saying that he planned to discuss the idea of a partnership with AI companies' executives as soon as next week.
If every company soon will be an AI company to some extent, much like every company became an Internet company to some extent, is the US government gonna take equity stakes in all of them?