Social Media Sidebar


Please sign up, comment on articles and bring your friends!

Current poll

PlanetTech is asking:

What do you think about our new web site?

Love it, indeed
Really good solution
Same as old one
The old one was better
This is a new option

Quote of the day

Just because something doesn’t do what you planned it to do doesn’t mean it’s useless.


Thomas Edison

People are Heated Over Whether or Not to Tax Robots over Automated Jobs

Posted in Business on 5th Mar, 2017 07:43 PM by Alex Muller

Manufacturing, transportation, and even customer service industries stand to lose jobs to automation in the near future. Amid this coming change in the way we live and work, industry leaders are fiercely debating how we can adjust public policy to adapt to this unprecedented way of doing business.


In a Forbes op-ed today, technology policy specialist Andrew Seamans reacts to Bill Gates’ argument from last week about whether we should tax robots. Gates argues that taxing robots that replace human jobs will help make up for lost income taxes and social security taxes, as well as make businesses more carefully consider the external costs of automation. Seamans counters that a robot tax would hamper innovation. But instead of looking for a definitive “yes” or “no” on this hypothetical question, maybe we should take a step back. After all, this automated future is still pending.

That’s not to say automation is a frivolous or speculative matter. No matter what automation deniers say, this change is coming. According to an early 2016 report, which, in a move that’s symptomatic of the new administration’s automation denialism, is no longer available on the White House website, White House economists told Congress that workers earning less than $20 an hour have an 83 percent chance of losing their jobs to automation. This is huge, and it’s something that policy makers will need to negotiate, especially in light of President Donald Trump’s focus on creating and keeping American jobs.
Gates and Seamans find common ground on the predicted effects of a robot tax: It would slow the rate at which companies move toward automation. Their attitudes toward whether this is a good thing, however, differ sharply. While Gates says a robot tax would encourage businesses to think long and hard about the societal consequences of automation, Seamans argues that such a tax would discourage innovation.
“Right now, the human worker who does, say, $50,000 worth of work in a factory, that income is taxed and you get income tax, social security tax, all those things,” says Gates. He highlights the fact that even though automation will make manufacturing cheaper, it comes at the expense of the societal benefit of tax revenue, which in turn helps support a society that prepares people for low- and high-tech jobs. Seamans disagrees with this assessment, though.
“Robot taxes would dissuade firms from investing in robots,” says Seamans, “which would lower economic growth, and, to the extent that robots complement labor in some cases, would lead to less hiring and lower wage growth.”
He also takes issue with the definition of a robot, noting that the industrial definition of a robot, a programmable arm used for manufacturing, does not cover some other automation technologies that people might call “robots.” These include automated chatbots, which are already employed for customer service.
“When we say we want to tax robots,” he asks, “do we want to tax all types of robots, including software robots and other forms of automation, or just robot arms?”
But before we decide how we define robots and whether to tax them, let’s establish a rough timeline for job automation. According to a December 2016 White House report, 80 to 100 percent of all trucking jobs will eventually disappear. And according to a recent article by the group of technology executives that make up the Forbes Technology Council, compliance jobs, retail cashier jobs, supply chain jobs, scheduling and travel jobs, taxi and ride-sharing jobs, and software testing jobs will all be automated in the coming decade.
This is just part of the list of jobs that will be automated in the near future, so yes, we do need to decide how policy makers should handle automation.
Writer and basic income advocate Scott Santens also disagrees with Gates’ idea for a robot tax. He says that instead of taxing robots, the government should focus on taxing capital gains and pollution instead of automation.
Whether or not we tax robots, both Seamans and Gates could be right: We need to make up for the tax revenue lost when human jobs are automated, but it doesn’t necessarily need to come from taxing robots. Whatever the case may be, we’ll need to decide soon.

Tags: robotroboticsbusinesshardwaresoftwareAI

Read original article » Back to category


Author: Guest
Posted: 2017-03-06
This is very timely and important debate. Obviously, people without jobs and income will lead to economically unsustainable situation
1 Replies
Author: Guest
Posted: 2017-03-06
One has to appreciate that this is type of a problem that has not been encountered before and one has to either envisage new jobs, provide adequate support for those people that lost jobs or tax robots Reply


Recent headlines

  • Posted in Medicine on 2018-06-18 20:18:46
    Insight into role gut bacteria play in more
    Posted in Science on 2018-06-18 20:12:58
    Blood-based biomarker may predict whether you’ll more
    Posted in Science on 2018-06-17 23:45:17
    SpinLaunch raises $40M from Airbus, Google and others more
    Posted in Science on 2018-06-17 01:08:50
    New eyedrops could repair corneas, make glasses more
    Posted in Science on 2018-06-17 01:02:51
    121 giant exoplanets in habitable zones may more
Posted in Business on 2013-10-10 01:33
China is working towards a manned lunar mission in more
Posted in Business on 2013-10-20 07:17
Spacex says China is their main competitor for more
Posted in Software on 2013-10-20 06:43
Pirate Bay Browser Clocks 1,000,000 more
Posted in Medicine on 2013-10-10 02:10
Google reportedly investing hundreds of millions into more
Posted in Medicine on 2013-10-14 03:13
Endothelial Cells Can Repair and Regenerate Organs, more
Posted in Science on 01.01.2010
Spacex says China is their main competitor for more
Posted in Science on 01.01.2010
Staring at Your Phone Could Be Making You Short more
Posted in Science on 01.01.2010
Oculus Rift virtual reality headset coming to mobile, more
Posted in Science on 01.01.2010
China is working towards a manned lunar mission in more
Posted in Science on 01.01.2010
Delivering drugs via nanoparticles to target more

Recent Blog Posts

  • Posted by AlexMuller
    In five years quantum computing will be more
    Posted by AlexMuller
    Google partners with Johnson and Johnson to make lower more
    Posted by AlexMuller
    Electron holography microscope with spatial resolution down more
    Posted by AlexMuller
    Lower cost advanced Nuclear power could dominate future US more
    Posted by AlexMuller
    Why Hasn’t AI Mastered Language Translation? more

Login to your Account

Login to your PlanetTech Account here

Remember me

Create a New Account

You just need username and password

The following errors occured:
Verify password:
Remember me