Advocates for implementing a universal basic income (UBI) funded by a 5% tax on transactions involving automated systems and AI agents argue that such a policy could effectively address income inequality exacerbated by technological advances. As AI and automation increasingly replace human jobs, a UBI would provide a financial safety net, ensuring that everyone has access to basic necessities regardless of employment status. Additionally, this tax targets the sectors benefiting most from automation, generating significant revenue to support the UBI without heavily burdening traditional workers or industries. Proponents also suggest that such a policy would foster innovation by providing individuals with financial stability, which could encourage entrepreneurial ventures and creative pursuits, as citizens wouldn’t be bound by the constraints of financial survival.

Conversely, critics argue that the proposed policy could stifle economic growth by imposing financial burdens on emerging technologies, potentially discouraging innovation and investment in AI and automation. They caution that the tax could increase operational costs for businesses reliant on these technologies, which may lead to higher consumer prices or even job losses if companies opt to relocate to countries with less stringent fiscal policies. Furthermore, opponents highlight implementation challenges, such as accurately identifying and taxing automated transactions, given the complexity of monitoring and regulating such systems. They also express concerns about the sustainability of funding the UBI through such a narrow tax base, which may not generate sufficient revenue as technological landscapes and tax avoidance strategies evolve.