Against robot taxes: scrutinizing the moral reasons for the preservation of work

Abstract

A recent political proposal to address the challenge of technological unemployment suggests that the state should impose a tax on labor-replacing technologies. The idea is to preserve jobs by disincentivizing automation. In this article, I critically assess the proposal from an ethical perspective. I show that, with respect to conceptions of distributive justice, it is unclear that precluding consumers’ potential real-income gains from automation can be justified. But foremost, I examine the moral ideal behind the normative claim to preserve labor. I show that the arguments in favor of a robot tax rely on doubtful moral convictions on the value of work and I conclude that a moral basis for imposing a robot tax is subject to justified scrutiny.

Untitled

“…The digital revolution, inextricably accompanied by the expansion of artificial intelligence, has been stirring up many extreme emotions in society, ranging from the hope that machines will completely free the human species from tedious, repetitive tasks, to more radical expectations that all of humanity will soon be able to stop working and robots will be taxed, which will lead to technological unemployment (Moser, 2021). This will give every human being the right to a permanent income in the form of a so-called technological dividend, payable regardless of status, and financed by taxing robot labor.…”