AI의 경제적 영향과 빈부 격차 해소를 위한 조세정책

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has advanced remarkably over the past decade, with the emergence of generative AI in late 2022 marking a turning point in its widespread application in everyday life. While the adoption of AI is expected to enhance productivity, it also entails adverse consequences such as job displacement, widening income inequality, and the erosion of labor-income- based tax revenues. Most countries currently adopt a dual income tax system that distinguishes between labor income and capital income. If a substantial number of workers are displaced by artificial intelligence (AI), the share of labor income in national income is likely to decline, while the share of capital income will increase. In such a scenario, as revenues from labor income taxation diminish, governments will inevitably be compelled to strengthen taxation on capital income in order to sustain fiscal capacity. In Korea, a rapidly aging society, the deployment of AI holds particular significance, as it can help offset the decline in the working-age population by boosting national productivity. Although the diffusion of AI is projected to accelerate among Korean firms, workers in occupations with high exposure to AI and limited complementarity face increased risks of wage reductions or job loss, underscoring the need for policy measures to mitigate inequality. To address these challenges, rather than implementing a universal basic income (UBI) that provides unconditional transfers, policies that reinforce incentives for re-employment—such as the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and unemployment benefits—should be prioritized and enhanced. In terms of financing, proposals include the introduction of a robot tax or strengthening taxation on capital income and etc. However, a robot tax raises issues of consistency with the current tax system, making taxation of capital gains on listed shares held by small shareholders a more feasible alternative. Nonetheless, as existing research on such taxation has yielded divergent projections, careful and multidimensional consideration is essential in its design. In the long term, it would be desirable to adopt a unified tax rate on interest income, dividend income, and capital gains, as implemented in Japan. Moreover, the tax system should allow the offsetting and carry-forward of losses within the same category of financial investment products. Ultimately, by addressing current shortcomings in the EITC and unemployment benefits, these instruments may serve as effective tools to alleviate inequality arising from the large-scale adoption of AI.