韩国教授金英顺谈“机器人税”：技术进步也要确保社会稳定

Core Viewpoint - The concept of a "robot tax" is not intended to penalize corporate innovation but to ensure that technological advancement progresses alongside social stability and inclusivity [3][5]. Group 1: Current Status and Proposals - No country or region has yet implemented a "robot tax" in any form, although some local proposals have been made, such as discussions in the European Parliament in 2017 and a proposal in San Francisco [2][6]. - Various academic proposals for a "robot tax" exist, aiming for social fairness and welfare, but they differ significantly in implementation methods, ranging from direct taxation to reducing related incentives [2][6]. Group 2: Purpose and Justification - The "robot tax" serves as a modern tool for renegotiating the social contract, allowing for a fairer distribution of automation benefits to fund retraining programs and maintain social safety nets [3][4]. - The tax aims to address three main objectives: compensating for lost tax revenue due to automation, moderating rapid automation development to prevent social unrest, and providing funding for retraining initiatives and potential universal basic income projects [7][8]. Group 3: Implementation Challenges - If only one country unilaterally imposes a "robot tax," it risks losing corporate competitiveness, leading to capital and technology outflow to countries with lower tax rates [8][9]. - Effective implementation of a "robot tax" may require international coordination to avoid harmful competition among nations, similar to the concept of a "global minimum corporate tax" [8][9]. Group 4: Alternative Approaches - Alternatives to a direct "robot tax" include eliminating excessive capital depreciation benefits, providing wage subsidies or tax credits to encourage hiring, and establishing employer-funded training funds [10]. - A differentiated global framework may be necessary, allowing developing countries to delay taxation to attract investment while developed countries could pilot such taxes due to their more robust social safety nets [10][11]. Group 5: Tax Base and Compliance - To prevent the "robot tax" from becoming a tool for base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS), it should be linked to the actual use of automation rather than just the location of corporate profits [11]. - Strong transparency rules and compliance measures aligned with BEPS principles are essential for ensuring fairness and preventing tax avoidance [11].