Core Viewpoint - The discussion around "robot tax" has resurfaced, with calls for taxation on robots and AI systems to support social security and address potential job losses due to automation [1][4][5]. Group 1: Background and Historical Context - The concept of taxing machines has been debated since the 1950s, evolving from "machine tax" to "robot tax" and "AI tax" [3]. - The European Parliament rejected a proposal for a "robot tax" in 2017, which was welcomed by the robotics industry, citing concerns over innovation and employment [3][4]. Group 2: Arguments For and Against Robot Tax - Proponents argue that a "robot tax" could provide funding for basic income to support those displaced by automation [4][5]. - Critics warn that imposing such a tax could hinder corporate profitability and innovation, potentially leading to reduced employment opportunities [4][6]. Group 3: Global Perspectives and Initiatives - Various countries and organizations have proposed or discussed the implementation of a "robot tax," including India and Germany, where political support exists among certain parties [5][6]. - In South Korea, a tax reform reduced incentives for automation investments, reflecting a similar approach to taxing automation indirectly [6]. Group 4: Taxation Models and Concepts - Concepts like "Human Equivalent Effort Time" (HEET) have been proposed as a basis for taxing AI and robots, suggesting a shift from traditional income tax models [8]. - Some experts suggest that companies using AI should pay higher taxes compared to traditional businesses, with proposals for a global framework for AI taxation [8]. Group 5: Economic Implications and Employment Impact - Estimates suggest that AI could displace up to 300 million jobs globally, affecting 25% of the workforce [10]. - However, there is debate over the extent of job losses, with some studies indicating that new job creation may offset losses in certain sectors [10][12].