如果人工智能导致大规模失业，劳动者不会高兴，税务机关也一样不会。过去一个世纪里，富裕国家主要靠对劳动和消费征税来分配繁荣，但如果AI按其拥护者所说那样迅速发展，这一模式可能崩溃。

AI对就业的影响仍有争议：一种情形是人类只是重新分工，经济更富裕后多数人仍有好工作；另一种更棘手的情形是，AI把原本流向劳动者的收入转移给资本持有者。现代历史中，劳资收入比长期保持约2:1的稳定关系，但这一格局一旦破裂，政府税基也会随之收缩。

经合组织成员平均约有50%的税收来自劳动，另有30%来自消费税，其余来自企业、资本和财产税；美国没有全国性消费税，因此尤其依赖劳动。若劳动收入下降，较现实的替代方案是大幅提高消费税，并让资本税在再分配中承担更多作用；更激进的做法则是让劳动者直接持有AI发展的股权。

If artificial intelligence causes mass unemployment, workers will not be thrilled, and neither will the taxman. For most of the past century, rich countries have relied on taxing work and consumption to share prosperity, but that model may collapse if AI advances as quickly as its boosters suggest.

The employment impact is disputed: humans may simply reshuffle into tasks AI cannot do, leaving most people with good jobs after a painful adjustment, or AI may divert income from workers to capital holders. Modern history has seen labour and capital income remain roughly in a two-to-one ratio, so a break in that pattern would also shrink the tax base.

On average, OECD countries raise about 50% of tax revenue from labour, 30% from consumption taxes, and the rest from corporate, capital and property levies; America is especially reliant on labour because it lacks a national consumption tax. If labour income falls, higher consumption taxes, more capital taxation, or even direct worker stakes in AI winners are among the main ways to keep redistribution going.

Source: How to share the AI windfall

Subtitle: Are taxes enough?

Dateline: 5月 14, 2026 11:25 上午