12 reasons most Americans want a share of AI’s growing wealth

The AI boom lights up Wall Street. Many homes still sit in its shadow. A July 2026 national poll from JUST Capital found that 65% of Americans want everyone to get a direct share of the wealth AI firms create.

Most groups picked cash paid for by a tax on AI profits. People see the money move and ask why so little flows their way.

That does not mean people want to shut AI down. JUST Capital found that 59% thought it would help the economy, up from 47% in fall 2025. Support for a public share reached 75% among Democrats, 62% among Republicans, and 57% among independents.

People Want the AI Boom to Reach Their Bank Accounts

The 65% result says one thing in plain words. Most people want a share they can use. JUST Capital found that cash paid for by a tax on AI profits was the top pick for almost every group. Support rose to 78% to 80% for adults ages 25 to 44.

This group has many work years left. It may face some of the most job changes. Martin Whittaker, CEO of JUST Capital, put the mood in clear terms: “The public understands the economic upside AI helps to create.”

Growth can look grand on a chart. It feels far off when rent, food, and care cost more. Cash, a work fund, or a public stake can help pay a real bill. That turns broad hope into cash in hand. This wish now has real weight in U.S. politics. That is no small shift.

The Idea Crosses America’s Political Divide

One reason this idea has force is its reach. The JUST Capital poll found support in each large political group. It stood at 75% among Democrats, 62% among Republicans, and 57% among independents. Those groups still clash on how to share the gains.

Some may back a tax and cash checks. Some may favor work funds. Others may want the public to own stock in AI firms. The poll does not pick one plan. It shows that the aim has wide appeal. That is rare in a split nation.

A voter can want small government and still dislike a tight club taking most of the prize. Another can back a large public role. Both may ask the same question: If AI makes a vast new pie, why should most people get crumbs?

Americans Already Think the Tax System Is Tilted

AI rose in a nation that was already mad about tax rules. An April 2026 Pew Research Center poll found that 61% of adults were bothered a lot by the sense that rich people do not pay a fair share. Another 60% felt that way about big firms.

Pew also found that 60% thought they paid more than their own fair share. That was up from 56% in 2023 and about half in 2019. New AI wealth lands on top of that old sore. Huge gains can look like proof that the rules favor those with the most. The rage did not start with AI. The boom has given it a new and very rich face.

AI Wealth Can Rise Through Stocks Faster Than Wages

Much of AI’s wealth does not arrive as pay. It shows up in stock, private shares, and rising firm values. The Federal Reserve put U.S. household stock wealth at $64.8 trillion in the first three months of 2026. The Fed says this wealth is concentrated among high-income households.

The International Monetary Fund warns that AI may make the wealth gap worse as more cash flows to those who own firms. A worker may get a small raise once a year. An early owner can gain millions as hopes rise. That sharp gap makes a public share feel less like a gift and more like a fair claim.

Job Anxiety Makes a Shared Fund Feel Like Insurance

Fear can change votes long before a job is lost. A 2025 Pew poll of 5,273 U.S. workers found that 52% felt worried about the future use of AI at work. Some 32% thought it would cut their own job hopes. Just 6% thought it would bring them more chances.

Take a made-up case of a help-desk worker. Her firm buys an AI tool, halts new hires, and earns more cash. She takes on work once done by two people. A cash share will not fix each strain.

A job fund, pay aid, or health plan could ease the shock if roles die or wages stall. We buy cover before a storm, not after the roof is gone.

The Federal Tax Base Relies Heavily on Human Work

The U.S. pays for much of its government by taxing those who earn pay. Brookings economists Anton Korinek and Lee M. Lockwood say payroll taxes make up about 36% of U.S. tax funds.

Personal income taxes add about 49%. Just one-fifth of that second pool comes from firm and stock income. This mix may face strain if AI moves cash from wages to those who own the tools. The two scholars write, “The main burden of taxation will have to shift away from labor.”

AI may make new roles too. Still, the math is plain. If profit grows far more than payroll, a tax base built on paychecks can shrink at the same time more people may need help.

Data Centers Put AI’s Costs in People’s Backyards

AI may live on a screen, but it takes up real land and power. A Lawrence Berkeley National Lab report found that data centers used 4.4% of U.S. power in 2023. Their share could reach 6.7% to 12% by 2028. Use rose from 58 terawatt-hours in 2014 to 176 in 2023.

The public has seen the cost. A May 2026 Gallup poll found that 71% did not want an AI data center near them. Half of that group named the use of key goods such as power and water.

Some 15% named high power bills. Towns may seek a share if new plants, grid work, wells, noise, and roads change daily life.

Taxpayers Helped Build the Scientific Foundation

Public science helped sow the seed for AI. A National Science Board report found that the U.S. government gave $159.8 billion to U.S. research in 2022. That was 18% of all such funds. It also paid for 40% of basic research.

This work can take years to bear fruit, so firms may not fund enough of it on their own. In July 2025, the National Science Foundation set out $100 million more for AI research hubs.

Firms still fund the largest share of U.S. research. Taxpayers cannot claim they built AI alone. They can point out that public labs, schools, roads, power, and years of shared thought helped the firms reach this rich new field.

People Prefer Benefits They Can See

The kind of share can matter as much as its size. JUST Capital found that most groups chose cash paid for by a tax on AI profit.

The youngest adults leaned more toward public stock, work skills, safe AI, and large funds held for all. Sen. Bernie Sanders gave the stock plan a clear shape in a June 2026 proposal.

It called for top AI firms to make a one-time stock payment equal to 50% of their shares. He tied it to Norway’s oil fund, then worth more than $2 trillion. His plan would face hard legal and market tests. Still, a stake you can track may feel more real than the hope that growth will reach you one day.

Corporate Priorities Don’t Match Public Priorities

The public and big firms do not rank AI goals the same way. JUST Capital’s summer 2026 work found that 63% of the public wanted AI gains put back into workers. So did 67% of large fund staff and market pros.

Firm leaders put new research first, at 72%. Some 54% chose gains for those who own shares. A second JUST review found that just 37% of 110 firms made their rules for safe and fair AI public. New research can lead to good tools and new jobs.

The firms do have a case. The gap still helps explain the call for a public share. People may not trust soft vows to fund fair pay or new skills. If firms pick labs and stock gains first, a tax or public stake may look like the firmest bridge to each home.

The Sharing Idea Has Escaped Its Political Corner

An idea gains force when rival camps start to use the same words. Sanders has backed a public stake paid for with 50% of stock in top AI firms.

In June 2026, Reuters reported that President Donald Trump planned talks with AI chiefs about giving part of their gains back to the public. A state-held stake was one idea. OpenAI and Anthropic have also put forth funds tied to AI growth. A firm’s free choice is not a U.S. tax.

Neither plan is the same as shares with state voting rights. Vast AI wealth may need a path that sends some of its worth past the tech hubs and stock desks that now stand first in line.

Sharing the Gains Doesn’t Require a Tax on Every Robot

The case for a public share needs a guardrail. A broad fee on code, chips, or each task done by a bot could slow good work. IMF economists Era Dabla-Norris and Ruud de Mooij state, “Yet, a tax on AI is not advisable.”

Their 2024 work backs stronger tax rules for firm profit, stock gains, and very high profit. The IMF points to a 15% base tax backed by more than 140 nations for large firms that work across borders. Brookings draws a useful line too.

Tax AI sold to the end user or rare windfall gains, but do not hit the chips that help work get done. That gives the 65% group a path that seeks a fair share without taxing each bot.

Key Takeaways

The 65% result shows a clear wish, not one set plan. People see $64.8 trillion in U.S. stock wealth, fears voiced by 52% of workers, and data sites that may use up to 12% of U.S. power by 2028.

Cash is fast. Work funds can guard jobs. Public stock can form a long stake. A tax on high profit or stock gains may work better than a fee on each AI tool.

The machine may make vast wealth. The hard choice is how wide a ring that wealth will warm.

Disclaimer – This list is solely the author’s opinion based on research and publicly available information. It is not intended to be professional advice.

Like our content? Be sure to follow us